ACSI vs. BAMG
ACSI (American Customer Satisfaction ETF) and BAMG (Brookstone Growth Stock ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. ACSI is passively managed, while BAMG is actively managed. Over the past year, ACSI returned 19.62% vs 24.36% for BAMG. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. ACSI charges 0.66%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BAMG.
Performance
ACSI vs. BAMG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, ACSI achieves a 10.57% return, which is significantly higher than BAMG's 8.87% return.
ACSI
- 1D
- 0.61%
- 1M
- 2.03%
- YTD
- 10.57%
- 6M
- 10.67%
- 1Y
- 19.62%
- 3Y*
- 18.13%
- 5Y*
- 9.08%
- 10Y*
- —
BAMG
- 1D
- -2.21%
- 1M
- 2.19%
- YTD
- 8.87%
- 6M
- 7.34%
- 1Y
- 24.36%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
ACSI vs. BAMG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
ACSI American Customer Satisfaction ETF | 10.57% | 10.70% | 22.51% | 14.76% |
BAMG Brookstone Growth Stock ETF | 8.87% | 17.03% | 24.01% | 11.91% |
Correlation
The correlation between ACSI and BAMG is 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.70 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2023 | 0.78 |
The correlation between ACSI and BAMG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.
ACSI vs. BAMG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
ACSI
BAMG
Consumer Cyclical
Communication Services
Technology
Consumer Defensive
Financial Services
Healthcare
Industrials
Utilities
Energy
Basic Materials
-
Real Estate
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
ACSI
BAMG
Communication Services
ACSI
BAMG
Technology
ACSI
BAMG
Consumer Defensive
ACSI
BAMG
Financial Services
ACSI
BAMG
Healthcare
ACSI
BAMG
Industrials
ACSI
BAMG
Utilities
ACSI
BAMG
Energy
ACSI
BAMG
Basic Materials
ACSI
-
BAMG
Real Estate
ACSI
-
BAMG
-
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
ACSI vs. BAMG — Risk / Return Rank
ACSI
BAMG
ACSI vs. BAMG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for American Customer Satisfaction ETF (ACSI) and Brookstone Growth Stock ETF (BAMG). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.
| ACSI | BAMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.11 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.21 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.30 | 1.28 | +0.02 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.54 | 1.87 | +0.67 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.78 | 7.21 | +2.57 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
ACSI vs. BAMG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum ACSI drawdown since its inception was -34.49%, which is greater than BAMG's maximum drawdown of -21.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ACSI and BAMG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| ACSI | BAMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.49% | -21.00% | -13.49% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.76% | -13.08% | +5.32% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -15.27% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.86% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.57% | -2.22% | +0.65% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.37% | -2.50% | -2.87% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.01% | 3.39% | -1.38% |
Volatility
ACSI vs. BAMG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for American Customer Satisfaction ETF (ACSI) is 4.09%, while Brookstone Growth Stock ETF (BAMG) has a volatility of 6.44%. This indicates that ACSI experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BAMG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| ACSI | BAMG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.09% | 6.44% | -2.35% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.13% | 12.13% | -3.00% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 11.56% | 15.34% | -3.78% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.68% | 17.18% | -0.50% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.40% | 17.18% | +0.22% |
ACSI vs. BAMG - Expense Ratio Comparison
ACSI has a 0.66% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMG's 0.95% expense ratio.
Dividends
ACSI vs. BAMG - Dividend Comparison
ACSI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.83%, while BAMG has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ACSI American Customer Satisfaction ETF | 0.83% | 0.91% | 0.69% | 1.01% | 0.81% | 0.31% | 0.82% | 1.64% | 1.59% | 1.20% | 0.18% |
BAMG Brookstone Growth Stock ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 1.24% | 0.12% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
ACSI and BAMG have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BAMG has higher volatility (6.44%) compared to ACSI (4.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ACSI dropped -34.49% vs BAMG's -21.00%.
On 1-year performance, BAMG leads with 24.36% vs 19.62% for ACSI. On fees, ACSI is cheaper at 0.66% per year. On volatility, ACSI has been the lower-risk option at 4.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, BAMG has performed better with a 24.36% return vs 19.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
ACSI is cheaper with a 0.66% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BAMG.
ACSI has the higher dividend yield at 0.83%, compared with 0.00% for BAMG.
They also come from different issuers: Exponential ETFs and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.66% for ACSI and 0.95% for BAMG.
ACSI currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.71 vs 1.60), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.
Find the right allocation for ACSI and BAMG
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer