BAMA vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

BAMA (Brookstone Active ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BAMA is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by Brookstone, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BAMA returned 20.01% vs 2.91% for BAMU. At a 0.00 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. BAMA charges 1.15%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

BAMA vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Brookstone Active ETF (BAMA) and Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAMA achieves a 8.30% return, which is significantly higher than BAMU's 1.18% return.

BAMA

• 1D: -0.40%
• 1M: 1.09%
• YTD: 8.30%
• 6M: 8.31%
• 1Y: 20.01%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BAMU

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.16%
• YTD: 1.18%
• 6M: 1.23%
• 1Y: 2.91%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BAMA vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BAMA Brookstone Active ETF	8.30%	12.61%	14.99%	8.02%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.18%	3.21%	4.14%	1.20%

Correlation

The correlation between BAMA and BAMU is -0.12, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.12
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 28, 2023	0.00

The correlation between BAMA and BAMU shifts across timeframes, from -0.12 (1 year) to 0.00 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

BAMA vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BAMA

BAMA Risk / Return Rank: 64
BAMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
BAMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
BAMA Omega Ratio Rank: 67
BAMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
BAMA Martin Ratio Rank: 67

BAMU

BAMU Risk / Return Rank: 98
BAMU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
BAMU Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
BAMU Omega Ratio Rank: 98
BAMU Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
BAMU Martin Ratio Rank: 99

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BAMA vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookstone Active ETF (BAMA) and Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU). 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.

	BAMA	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.04	5.01	-2.97
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.90	8.84	-5.93
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	2.43	-1.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.73	24.72	-21.99
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.03	97.90	-85.86

BAMA vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAMA Sharpe Ratio is 2.04, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 5.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAMA and BAMU, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BAMA vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAMA drawdown since its inception was -12.27%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMA and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	BAMA	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.27%	-0.36%	-11.91%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.35%	-0.12%	-7.23%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.05%	0.00%	-1.05%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.27%	-0.02%	-1.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.67%	0.03%	+1.64%

Volatility

BAMA vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

Brookstone Active ETF (BAMA) has a higher volatility of 4.27% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.09%. This indicates that BAMA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BAMU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BAMA	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.27%	0.09%	+4.18%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.56%	0.40%	+8.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.89%	0.58%	+9.31%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.40%	0.87%	+9.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.40%	0.87%	+9.53%

BAMA vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAMA has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is higher than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

BAMA vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

BAMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.31%, less than BAMU's 3.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BAMA Brookstone Active ETF	1.31%	1.54%	1.49%	0.45%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	3.05%	3.20%	3.97%	0.84%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BAMA and BAMU in my portfolio?

BAMA and BAMU have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BAMA or BAMU?

BAMA has higher volatility (4.27%) compared to BAMU (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMA dropped -12.27% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, BAMA or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, BAMA leads with 20.01% vs 2.91% for BAMU. On fees, BAMU is cheaper at 1.09% per year. On volatility, BAMU has been the lower-risk option at 0.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BAMA or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, BAMA has performed better with a 20.01% return vs 2.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BAMA or BAMU?

BAMU is cheaper with a 1.09% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for BAMA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BAMA or BAMU?

BAMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.05%, compared with 1.31% for BAMA.

What is the main difference between BAMA and BAMU?

BAMA is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for BAMA and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.01 vs 2.04), 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.