BAMA vs. MFUL

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

BAMA (Brookstone Active ETF) and MFUL (Mindful Conservative ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BAMA returned 21.76% vs 7.53% for MFUL. Their correlation of 0.83 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BAMA charges 1.15%/yr vs 1.10%/yr for MFUL.

Performance

BAMA vs. MFUL - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAMA achieves a 9.45% return, which is significantly higher than MFUL's 3.57% return.

BAMA

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: 4.38%
• YTD: 9.45%
• 6M: 10.10%
• 1Y: 21.76%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

MFUL

• 1D: 0.38%
• 1M: 1.61%
• YTD: 3.57%
• 6M: 3.81%
• 1Y: 7.53%
• 3Y*: 5.05%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BAMA vs. MFUL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BAMA Brookstone Active ETF	9.45%	12.61%	14.99%	8.02%
MFUL Mindful Conservative ETF	3.57%	4.51%	5.36%	3.54%

Correlation

The correlation between BAMA and MFUL is 0.88, 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	0.88
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 29, 2023	0.83

The correlation between BAMA and MFUL has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.83 to 0.88 - a consistent structural relationship.

BAMA vs. MFUL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BAMA	MFUL
Technology	36.8%	25.8%
Financial Services	13.7%	10.7%
Communication Services	11.3%	8.4%
Consumer Cyclical	9.5%	8.7%
Industrials	9.5%	9.9%
Healthcare	6.9%	8.4%
Consumer Defensive	3.5%	6.7%
Basic Materials	2.9%	5.5%
Energy	2.5%	8.0%
Utilities	1.9%	5.5%
Real Estate	1.6%	2.4%

Return for Risk

BAMA vs. MFUL — Risk / Return Rank

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

BAMA

BAMA Risk / Return Rank: 70
BAMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
BAMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 75
BAMA Omega Ratio Rank: 74
BAMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 60
BAMA Martin Ratio Rank: 72

MFUL

MFUL Risk / Return Rank: 54
MFUL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
MFUL Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
MFUL Omega Ratio Rank: 61
MFUL Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
MFUL Martin Ratio Rank: 51

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. MFUL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookstone Active ETF (BAMA) and Mindful Conservative ETF (MFUL). 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	MFUL	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.39	1.93	+0.46
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.45	2.74	+0.71
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.45	1.38	+0.07
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.00	2.27	+0.74
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	13.81	8.78	+5.03
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BAMA vs. MFUL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAMA Sharpe Ratio is 2.39, which is comparable to the MFUL Sharpe Ratio of 1.93. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAMA and MFUL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	BAMA	MFUL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.39	1.93	+0.46
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.70	0.02	+1.68

Drawdowns

BAMA vs. MFUL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAMA drawdown since its inception was -12.27%, smaller than the maximum MFUL drawdown of -16.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMA and MFUL.

Drawdown Indicators

	BAMA	MFUL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-12.27%	-16.41%	+4.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.35%	-3.36%	-3.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-4.74%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.18%	+0.18%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.26%	-9.51%	+8.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.60%	0.87%	+0.73%

Volatility

BAMA vs. MFUL - Volatility Comparison

Brookstone Active ETF (BAMA) has a higher volatility of 3.10% compared to Mindful Conservative ETF (MFUL) at 1.43%. This indicates that BAMA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than MFUL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BAMA	MFUL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.10%	1.43%	+1.67%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.69%	3.23%	+4.46%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.14%	3.92%	+5.22%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.22%	4.24%	+5.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.22%	4.24%	+5.98%

BAMA vs. MFUL - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAMA has a 1.15% expense ratio, which is higher than MFUL's 1.10% expense ratio.

Dividends

BAMA vs. MFUL - Dividend Comparison

BAMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.30%, less than MFUL's 3.00% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BAMA Brookstone Active ETF	1.30%	1.54%	1.49%	0.45%	0.00%
MFUL Mindful Conservative ETF	3.00%	3.31%	2.59%	5.00%	0.29%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BAMA and MFUL in my portfolio?

BAMA and MFUL have a correlation of 0.88, 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 MFUL?

BAMA has higher volatility (3.10%) compared to MFUL (1.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMA dropped -12.27% vs MFUL's -16.41%.

Which ETF is better, BAMA or MFUL?

On 1-year performance, BAMA leads with 21.76% vs 7.53% for MFUL. On fees, MFUL is cheaper at 1.10% per year. On volatility, MFUL has been the lower-risk option at 1.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BAMA or MFUL?

Over the 1-year period, BAMA has performed better with a 21.76% return vs 7.53%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BAMA or MFUL?

MFUL is cheaper with a 1.10% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for BAMA.

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

MFUL has the higher dividend yield at 3.00%, compared with 1.30% for BAMA.

What is the main difference between BAMA and MFUL?

They also come from different issuers: Brookstone and Mohr Funds. Their fees differ too: 1.15% for BAMA and 1.10% for MFUL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.39 vs 1.93), 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.