BAMB vs. BBAG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

BAMB (Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF) and BBAG (JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF) are both Intermediate Core Bond funds. BAMB is actively managed, while BBAG is passively managed. Over the past year, BAMB returned 2.78% vs 5.12% for BBAG. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BAMB charges 1.09%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for BBAG.

Performance

BAMB vs. BBAG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF (BAMB) and JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (BBAG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAMB achieves a -0.85% return, which is significantly lower than BBAG's 0.17% return.

BAMB

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: -0.17%
• YTD: -0.85%
• 6M: -1.18%
• 1Y: 2.78%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BBAG

• 1D: -0.23%
• 1M: 0.21%
• YTD: 0.17%
• 6M: 0.02%
• 1Y: 5.12%
• 3Y*: 3.86%
• 5Y*: -0.01%
• 10Y*: —

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

BAMB vs. BBAG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BAMB Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF	-0.85%	6.15%	3.01%	2.94%
BBAG JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF	0.17%	7.27%	1.26%	6.84%

Correlation

The correlation between BAMB and BBAG is 0.92, 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	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 28, 2023	0.90

The correlation between BAMB and BBAG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

BAMB vs. BBAG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BAMB	BBAG
Financial Services	98.5%	6.5%
Basic Materials	-	0.5%
Communication Services	-	46.6%
Consumer Cyclical	-	1.6%
Consumer Defensive	-	1.0%
Energy	-	1.2%
Healthcare	-	2.6%
Industrials	-	1.6%
Real Estate	-	6.8%
Technology	-	12.0%
Utilities	-	2.3%

Return for Risk

BAMB vs. BBAG — Risk / Return Rank

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

BAMB

BAMB Risk / Return Rank: 21
BAMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 22
BAMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
BAMB Omega Ratio Rank: 20
BAMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 20
BAMB Martin Ratio Rank: 21

BBAG

BBAG Risk / Return Rank: 37
BBAG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
BBAG Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
BBAG Omega Ratio Rank: 35
BBAG Calmar Ratio Rank: 38
BBAG Martin Ratio Rank: 36

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. BBAG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF (BAMB) and JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (BBAG). 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.

	BAMB	BBAG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.72	1.31	-0.60
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.08	1.96	-0.88
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.12	1.23	-0.11
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.83	1.85	-1.02
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	2.43	5.54	-3.11
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

BAMB vs. BBAG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAMB Sharpe Ratio is 0.72, which is lower than the BBAG Sharpe Ratio of 1.31. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAMB and BBAG, 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

	BAMB	BBAG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.72	1.31	-0.60
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	-0.00	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.03	0.32	+0.71

Drawdowns

BAMB vs. BBAG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAMB drawdown since its inception was -4.48%, smaller than the maximum BBAG drawdown of -18.73%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMB and BBAG.

Drawdown Indicators

	BAMB	BBAG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.48%	-18.73%	+14.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.37%	-2.78%	-0.59%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-6.18%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-18.06%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.51%	-2.84%	+0.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.01%	-6.22%	+5.21%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.15%	0.93%	+0.22%

Volatility

BAMB vs. BBAG - Volatility Comparison

Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF (BAMB) and JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF (BBAG) have volatilities of 1.18% and 1.24%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BAMB	BBAG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.18%	1.24%	-0.06%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.72%	2.82%	-0.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.90%	3.92%	-0.02%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.06%	5.93%	-1.87%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.06%	5.80%	-1.74%

BAMB vs. BBAG - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAMB has a 1.09% expense ratio, which is higher than BBAG's 0.03% expense ratio.

Dividends

BAMB vs. BBAG - Dividend Comparison

BAMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.95%, less than BBAG's 4.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
BAMB Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF	2.95%	2.85%	2.90%	0.73%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
BBAG JPMorgan BetaBuilders U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF	4.37%	4.29%	4.25%	3.60%	2.23%	1.44%	2.26%	2.92%	0.16%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BAMB and BBAG in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, BAMB and BBAG move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, BAMB or BBAG?

BBAG has higher volatility (1.24%) compared to BAMB (1.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMB dropped -4.48% vs BBAG's -18.73%.

Which ETF is better, BAMB or BBAG?

On 1-year performance, BBAG leads with 5.12% vs 2.78% for BAMB. On fees, BBAG is cheaper at 0.03% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BAMB or BBAG?

Over the 1-year period, BBAG has performed better with a 5.12% return vs 2.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BAMB or BBAG?

BBAG is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMB.

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

BBAG has the higher dividend yield at 4.37%, compared with 2.95% for BAMB.

What is the main difference between BAMB and BBAG?

They also come from different issuers: Brookstone and JPMorgan. Their fees differ too: 1.09% for BAMB and 0.03% for BBAG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BBAG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.31 vs 0.72), 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.