PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BAMB vs. BAMG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BAMB vs. BAMG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF (BAMB) and Brookstone Growth Stock ETF (BAMG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAMB achieves a -1.02% return, which is significantly lower than BAMG's 11.33% return.


BAMB

1D
-0.28%
1M
0.20%
YTD
-1.02%
6M
-0.99%
1Y
1.89%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BAMG

1D
-0.01%
1M
4.51%
YTD
11.33%
6M
9.98%
1Y
28.38%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BAMB vs. BAMG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
BAMB
Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF
-1.02%6.15%3.01%2.94%
BAMG
Brookstone Growth Stock ETF
11.33%17.03%24.01%11.91%

Correlation

The correlation between BAMB and BAMG is 0.24, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.24

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2023

0.16

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

BAMB vs. BAMG — Risk / Return Rank

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

BAMB
BAMB Risk / Return Rank: 1515
Overall Rank
BAMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1616
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BAMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 1515
Sortino Ratio Rank
BAMB Omega Ratio Rank: 1414
Omega Ratio Rank
BAMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 1515
Calmar Ratio Rank
BAMB Martin Ratio Rank: 1515
Martin Ratio Rank

BAMG
BAMG Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
BAMG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5858
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BAMG Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
BAMG Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
BAMG Calmar Ratio Rank: 4545
Calmar Ratio Rank
BAMG Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

BAMB vs. BAMG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF (BAMB) and Brookstone Growth Stock ETF (BAMG). 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.


BAMBBAMGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.39

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.81

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.09

1.33

-0.24

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.57

2.18

-1.61

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.49

8.41

-6.92

BAMB vs. BAMG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAMB Sharpe Ratio is 0.49, which is lower than the BAMG Sharpe Ratio of 1.88. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAMB and BAMG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

BAMB vs. BAMG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAMB drawdown since its inception was -4.48%, smaller than the maximum BAMG drawdown of -21.00%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMB and BAMG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BAMBBAMGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-4.48%

-21.00%

+16.52%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-3.37%

-13.08%

+9.71%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.67%

-0.01%

-2.66%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.03%

-2.50%

+1.47%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.27%

3.38%

-2.11%

Volatility

BAMB vs. BAMG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF (BAMB) is 1.13%, while Brookstone Growth Stock ETF (BAMG) has a volatility of 5.95%. This indicates that BAMB experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BAMG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BAMBBAMGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

1.13%

5.95%

-4.82%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

2.85%

11.94%

-9.09%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.86%

15.19%

-11.33%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

4.07%

17.14%

-13.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

4.07%

17.14%

-13.07%

BAMB vs. BAMG - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAMB has a 1.09% expense ratio, which is higher than BAMG's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

BAMB vs. BAMG - Dividend Comparison

BAMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.95%, while BAMG has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM202520242023
BAMB
Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF
2.95%2.85%2.90%0.73%
BAMG
Brookstone Growth Stock ETF
0.00%0.00%1.24%0.12%

Frequently Asked Questions


BAMB and BAMG have a correlation of 0.24, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BAMG has higher volatility (5.95%) compared to BAMB (1.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMB dropped -4.48% vs BAMG's -21.00%.

On 1-year performance, BAMG leads with 28.38% vs 1.89% for BAMB. On fees, BAMG is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, BAMB has been the lower-risk option at 1.13%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BAMG has performed better with a 28.38% return vs 1.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BAMG is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMB.

BAMB has the higher dividend yield at 2.95%, compared with 0.00% for BAMG.

BAMB is categorized as Intermediate Core Bond, while BAMG is Large Cap Growth Equities. Their fees differ too: 1.09% for BAMB and 0.95% for BAMG.

BAMG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.88 vs 0.49), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BAMB and BAMG

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