BNO vs IVV
United States Brent Oil Fund, LP vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. BNO delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BNO | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.15% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $652M | $865.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 5 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +79.54% | +13.72% | |
| 1Y Return | +72.22% | +21.64% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.04% | +21.55% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +22.38% | +13.27% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 35.2% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -93.3% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | USCF Investments | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Commodity | Equity | |
| Inception | Jun 2, 2010 | May 15, 2000 |
BNO vs IVV Performance
United States Brent Oil Fund, LP (BNO) is a ETF from USCF Investments and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BNO returned +72.22% while IVV returned +21.64%. Year to date, BNO is up 79.54% versus a gain of 13.72% for IVV.
Over three years, BNO compounded at +20.04% per year against +21.55% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +22.38% and +13.27% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.04% annualized vs +4.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BNO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 35.2% compared with 15.1% for IVV. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -93.3% for BNO and -56.5% for IVV. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.33. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BNO charges 1.15% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $115 vs $3 annually, a gap of $112 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BNO currently yields 0.00% against 1.09% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
BNO and IVV share 0 holdings out of 507 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BNO or IVV?
BNO has an expense ratio of 1.15% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $112 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BNO or IVV?
Over the past year BNO returned +72.22% vs +21.64% for IVV, so BNO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), BNO annualized +4.31% vs +7.04% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BNO or IVV?
BNO has been the more volatile fund at 35.2% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: BNO -93.3% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both BNO and IVV?
BNO and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.33, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BNO and IVV?
BNO and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 507 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BNO or IVV?
BNO yields 0.00% while IVV yields 1.09%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.