BAMB vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

BAMB (Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BAMB is a Intermediate Core Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BAMB returned 1.89% vs 2.91% for BAMU. At a 0.14 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. Both charge a 1.09% expense ratio.

Performance

BAMB vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF (BAMB) 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, BAMB achieves a -1.02% return, which is significantly lower than BAMU's 1.18% return.

BAMB

• 1D: -0.28%
• 1M: 0.20%
• YTD: -1.02%
• 6M: -0.99%
• 1Y: 1.89%
• 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)

BAMB vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BAMB Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF	-1.02%	6.15%	3.01%	2.94%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.18%	3.21%	4.14%	1.20%

Correlation

The correlation between BAMB and BAMU is 0.11, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.11
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2023	0.14

Return for Risk

BAMB vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

BAMB

BAMB Risk / Return Rank: 15
BAMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 16
BAMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 15
BAMB Omega Ratio Rank: 14
BAMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 15
BAMB Martin Ratio Rank: 15

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.

BAMB vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	BAMB	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.49	5.01	-4.51
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.75	8.84	-8.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.09	2.43	-1.34
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.57	24.72	-24.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.49	97.90	-96.40

BAMB vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAMB Sharpe Ratio is 0.49, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 5.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAMB 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

BAMB vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAMB drawdown since its inception was -4.48%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMB and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	BAMB	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.48%	-0.36%	-4.12%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.37%	-0.12%	-3.25%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.67%	0.00%	-2.67%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.03%	-0.02%	-1.01%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.27%	0.03%	+1.24%

Volatility

BAMB vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF (BAMB) has a higher volatility of 1.13% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.09%. This indicates that BAMB'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

	BAMB	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.13%	0.09%	+1.04%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.85%	0.40%	+2.45%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.86%	0.58%	+3.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.07%	0.87%	+3.20%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.07%	0.87%	+3.20%

BAMB vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both BAMB and BAMU have an expense ratio of 1.09%.

Dividends

BAMB vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

BAMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.95%, less than BAMU's 3.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BAMB Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF	2.95%	2.85%	2.90%	0.73%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	3.05%	3.20%	3.97%	0.84%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BAMB and BAMU in my portfolio?

BAMB and BAMU have a correlation of 0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BAMB or BAMU?

BAMB has higher volatility (1.13%) compared to BAMU (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMB dropped -4.48% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, BAMB or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, BAMU leads with 2.91% vs 1.89% for BAMB. Both ETFs have the same 1.09% expense ratio. 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, BAMB or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, BAMU has performed better with a 2.91% return vs 1.89%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BAMB or BAMU?

BAMB and BAMU have the same expense ratio: 1.09% per year.

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

BAMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.05%, compared with 2.95% for BAMB.

What is the main difference between BAMB and BAMU?

BAMB is categorized as Intermediate Core Bond, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.01 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.