BAMA vs. BAMV

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

BAMA (Brookstone Active ETF) and BAMV (Brookstone Value Stock ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BAMA is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by Brookstone, while BAMV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BAMA returned 20.01% vs 15.91% for BAMV. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BAMA charges 1.15%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for BAMV.

Performance

BAMA vs. BAMV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Brookstone Active ETF (BAMA) and Brookstone Value Stock ETF (BAMV). 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 lower than BAMV's 10.15% return.

BAMA

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

BAMV

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: 1.10%
• YTD: 10.15%
• 6M: 9.60%
• 1Y: 15.91%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BAMA vs. BAMV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BAMA Brookstone Active ETF	8.30%	12.61%	14.99%	8.02%
BAMV Brookstone Value Stock ETF	10.15%	7.66%	12.03%	13.82%

Correlation

The correlation between BAMA and BAMV is 0.60, 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	0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 28, 2023	0.65

The correlation between BAMA and BAMV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BAMA vs. BAMV — 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

BAMV

BAMV Risk / Return Rank: 43
BAMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
BAMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
BAMV Omega Ratio Rank: 36
BAMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
BAMV Martin Ratio Rank: 47

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. BAMV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookstone Active ETF (BAMA) and Brookstone Value Stock ETF (BAMV). 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	BAMV	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.04	1.34	+0.69
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.90	1.96	+0.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.23	+0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.73	2.57	+0.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.03	7.75	+4.29

BAMA vs. BAMV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAMA Sharpe Ratio is 2.04, which is higher than the BAMV Sharpe Ratio of 1.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAMA and BAMV, 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. BAMV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAMA drawdown since its inception was -12.27%, smaller than the maximum BAMV drawdown of -14.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMA and BAMV.

Drawdown Indicators

	BAMA	BAMV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.27%	-14.56%	+2.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.35%	-6.23%	-1.12%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.05%	-1.07%	+0.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.27%	-1.99%	+0.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.67%	2.06%	-0.39%

Volatility

BAMA vs. BAMV - Volatility Comparison

Brookstone Active ETF (BAMA) has a higher volatility of 4.27% compared to Brookstone Value Stock ETF (BAMV) at 3.76%. This indicates that BAMA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BAMV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BAMA	BAMV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.27%	3.76%	+0.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.56%	8.63%	-0.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.89%	11.93%	-2.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.40%	13.73%	-3.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.40%	13.73%	-3.33%

BAMA vs. BAMV - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAMA has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is higher than BAMV's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

BAMA vs. BAMV - Dividend Comparison

BAMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.31%, more than BAMV's 1.27% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BAMA Brookstone Active ETF	1.31%	1.54%	1.49%	0.45%
BAMV Brookstone Value Stock ETF	1.27%	1.32%	3.66%	0.19%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BAMA and BAMV in my portfolio?

BAMA and BAMV have a correlation of 0.60, 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 BAMV?

BAMA has higher volatility (4.27%) compared to BAMV (3.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMA dropped -12.27% vs BAMV's -14.56%.

Which ETF is better, BAMA or BAMV?

On 1-year performance, BAMA leads with 20.01% vs 15.91% for BAMV. On fees, BAMV is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, BAMV has been the lower-risk option at 3.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BAMA or BAMV?

Over the 1-year period, BAMA has performed better with a 20.01% return vs 15.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BAMA or BAMV?

BAMV is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for BAMA.

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

BAMA has the higher dividend yield at 1.31%, compared with 1.27% for BAMV.

What is the main difference between BAMA and BAMV?

BAMA is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while BAMV is Large Cap Value Equities. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for BAMA and 0.95% for BAMV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.04 vs 1.34), 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.