BAMA vs. AVMA
BAMA (Brookstone Active ETF) and AVMA (Avantis Moderate Allocation ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BAMA returned 21.76% vs 23.97% for AVMA. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BAMA charges 1.15%/yr vs 0.21%/yr for AVMA.
Performance
BAMA vs. AVMA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BAMA achieves a 9.45% return, which is significantly lower than AVMA's 10.43% return.
BAMA
- 1D
- 0.18%
- 1M
- 4.38%
- YTD
- 9.45%
- 6M
- 10.10%
- 1Y
- 21.76%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AVMA
- 1D
- -0.44%
- 1M
- 2.85%
- YTD
- 10.43%
- 6M
- 11.18%
- 1Y
- 23.97%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BAMA vs. AVMA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BAMA Brookstone Active ETF | 9.45% | 12.61% | 14.99% | 8.02% |
AVMA Avantis Moderate Allocation ETF | 10.43% | 16.72% | 10.01% | 9.33% |
Correlation
The correlation between BAMA and AVMA is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.90 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 29, 2023 | 0.89 |
The correlation between BAMA and AVMA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.90 - a consistent structural relationship.
BAMA vs. AVMA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
BAMA
AVMA
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
BAMA
AVMA
Financial Services
BAMA
AVMA
Communication Services
BAMA
AVMA
Consumer Cyclical
BAMA
AVMA
Industrials
BAMA
AVMA
Healthcare
BAMA
AVMA
Consumer Defensive
BAMA
AVMA
Basic Materials
BAMA
AVMA
Energy
BAMA
AVMA
Utilities
BAMA
AVMA
Real Estate
BAMA
AVMA
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
BAMA vs. AVMA — Risk / Return Rank
BAMA
AVMA
BAMA vs. AVMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookstone Active ETF (BAMA) and Avantis Moderate Allocation ETF (AVMA). 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.
| BAMA | AVMA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.39 | 2.68 | -0.29 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.45 | 3.84 | -0.39 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.45 | 1.50 | -0.05 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.00 | 3.76 | -0.76 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.81 | 15.96 | -2.14 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| BAMA | AVMA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.39 | 2.68 | -0.29 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.70 | 1.54 | +0.16 |
Drawdowns
BAMA vs. AVMA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BAMA drawdown since its inception was -12.27%, roughly equal to the maximum AVMA drawdown of -11.81%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMA and AVMA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BAMA | AVMA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.27% | -11.81% | -0.46% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.35% | -6.40% | -0.95% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.44% | +0.44% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.26% | -1.55% | +0.29% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.60% | 1.51% | +0.09% |
Volatility
BAMA vs. AVMA - Volatility Comparison
Brookstone Active ETF (BAMA) has a higher volatility of 3.10% compared to Avantis Moderate Allocation ETF (AVMA) at 2.63%. This indicates that BAMA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than AVMA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BAMA | AVMA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.10% | 2.63% | +0.47% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.69% | 7.08% | +0.61% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.14% | 8.99% | +0.15% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.22% | 10.29% | -0.07% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.22% | 10.29% | -0.07% |
BAMA vs. AVMA - Expense Ratio Comparison
BAMA has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is higher than AVMA's 0.21% expense ratio.
Dividends
BAMA vs. AVMA - Dividend Comparison
BAMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.30%, less than AVMA's 2.34% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
AVMA Avantis Moderate Allocation ETF | 2.34% | 2.21% | 2.28% | 1.11% |
BAMA Brookstone Active ETF | 1.30% | 1.54% | 1.49% | 0.45% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BAMA and AVMA have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BAMA has higher volatility (3.10%) compared to AVMA (2.63%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMA dropped -12.27% vs AVMA's -11.81%.
On 1-year performance, AVMA leads with 23.97% vs 21.76% for BAMA. On fees, AVMA is cheaper at 0.21% per year. On volatility, AVMA has been the lower-risk option at 2.63%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, AVMA has performed better with a 23.97% return vs 21.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
AVMA is cheaper with a 0.21% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for BAMA.
AVMA has the higher dividend yield at 2.34%, compared with 1.30% for BAMA.
They also come from different issuers: Brookstone and Avantis. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for BAMA and 0.21% for AVMA.
AVMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.68 vs 2.39), 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 BAMA and AVMA
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