BAMA vs. CAOS
BAMA (Brookstone Active ETF) and CAOS (Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BAMA is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by Brookstone, while CAOS is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Alpha Architect. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BAMA returned 21.76% vs 1.88% for CAOS. At a correlation of -0.10, they often move in opposite directions. BAMA charges 1.15%/yr vs 0.63%/yr for CAOS.
Performance
BAMA vs. CAOS - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BAMA achieves a 9.45% return, which is significantly higher than CAOS's 0.82% return.
BAMA
- 1D
- 0.18%
- 1M
- 4.38%
- YTD
- 9.45%
- 6M
- 10.10%
- 1Y
- 21.76%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CAOS
- 1D
- 0.12%
- 1M
- -0.09%
- YTD
- 0.82%
- 6M
- 0.69%
- 1Y
- 1.88%
- 3Y*
- 4.26%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BAMA vs. CAOS - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BAMA Brookstone Active ETF | 9.45% | 12.61% | 14.99% | 8.02% |
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF | 0.82% | 2.55% | 5.33% | 2.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between BAMA and CAOS is -0.34, 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 | -0.35 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 29, 2023 | -0.10 |
Over the past year, the inverse relationship between BAMA and CAOS has strengthened: their correlation has moved from -0.10 to -0.34, meaning they now move in opposite directions more often than their long-term average.
BAMA vs. CAOS - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
BAMA
CAOS
Technology
Financial Services
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Basic Materials
Energy
Utilities
Real Estate
Technology
BAMA
CAOS
Financial Services
BAMA
CAOS
Communication Services
BAMA
CAOS
Consumer Cyclical
BAMA
CAOS
Industrials
BAMA
CAOS
Healthcare
BAMA
CAOS
Consumer Defensive
BAMA
CAOS
Basic Materials
BAMA
CAOS
Energy
BAMA
CAOS
Utilities
BAMA
CAOS
Real Estate
BAMA
CAOS
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. CAOS — Risk / Return Rank
BAMA
CAOS
BAMA vs. CAOS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookstone Active ETF (BAMA) and Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS). 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 | CAOS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 2.39 | 1.24 | +1.15 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 3.45 | 1.98 | +1.47 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.45 | 1.26 | +0.19 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.00 | 2.49 | +0.51 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.81 | 6.22 | +7.59 |
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 | CAOS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.39 | 1.24 | +1.15 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.70 | 1.21 | +0.49 |
Drawdowns
BAMA vs. CAOS - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BAMA drawdown since its inception was -12.27%, which is greater than CAOS's maximum drawdown of -3.60%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMA and CAOS.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BAMA | CAOS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.27% | -3.60% | -8.67% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.35% | -0.76% | -6.59% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -3.60% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -1.07% | +1.07% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.26% | -0.90% | -0.36% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.60% | 0.30% | +1.30% |
Volatility
BAMA vs. CAOS - Volatility Comparison
Brookstone Active ETF (BAMA) has a higher volatility of 3.10% compared to Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF (CAOS) at 0.26%. This indicates that BAMA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CAOS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BAMA | CAOS | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.10% | 0.26% | +2.84% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.69% | 1.03% | +6.66% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 9.14% | 1.52% | +7.62% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 10.22% | 4.26% | +5.96% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 10.22% | 4.26% | +5.96% |
BAMA vs. CAOS - Expense Ratio Comparison
BAMA has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is higher than CAOS's 0.63% expense ratio.
Dividends
BAMA vs. CAOS - Dividend Comparison
BAMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.30%, while CAOS has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BAMA Brookstone Active ETF | 1.30% | 1.54% | 1.49% | 0.45% |
CAOS Alpha Architect Tail Risk ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BAMA and CAOS have a correlation of -0.34, 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 CAOS (0.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMA dropped -12.27% vs CAOS's -3.60%.
On 1-year performance, BAMA leads with 21.76% vs 1.88% for CAOS. On fees, CAOS is cheaper at 0.63% per year. On volatility, CAOS has been the lower-risk option at 0.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, BAMA has performed better with a 21.76% return vs 1.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
CAOS is cheaper with a 0.63% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for BAMA.
BAMA has the higher dividend yield at 1.30%, compared with 0.00% for CAOS.
BAMA is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while CAOS is Options Trading. They also come from different issuers: Brookstone and Alpha Architect. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for BAMA and 0.63% for CAOS.
BAMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 vs 1.24), 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 CAOS
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