BAMB vs. EDGF

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

BAMB (Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF) and EDGF (3EDGE Dynamic Fixed Income ETF) are both Intermediate Core Bond funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BAMB returned 2.87% vs 3.51% for EDGF. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BAMB charges 1.09%/yr vs 0.79%/yr for EDGF.

Performance

BAMB vs. EDGF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF (BAMB) and 3EDGE Dynamic Fixed Income ETF (EDGF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAMB achieves a -0.73% return, which is significantly lower than EDGF's 0.95% return.

BAMB

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: -0.31%
• YTD: -0.73%
• 6M: -0.90%
• 1Y: 2.87%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

EDGF

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.16%
• YTD: 0.95%
• 6M: 1.08%
• 1Y: 3.51%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BAMB vs. EDGF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BAMB Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF	-0.73%	6.15%	-2.55%
EDGF 3EDGE Dynamic Fixed Income ETF	0.95%	4.36%	-1.41%

Correlation

The correlation between BAMB and EDGF is 0.65, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.65
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 4, 2024	0.75

The correlation between BAMB and EDGF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.65 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

BAMB vs. EDGF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BAMB	EDGF
Financial Services	98.5%	99.2%
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

BAMB vs. EDGF — Risk / Return Rank

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

BAMB

BAMB Risk / Return Rank: 20
BAMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
BAMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 21
BAMB Omega Ratio Rank: 20
BAMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
BAMB Martin Ratio Rank: 19

EDGF

EDGF Risk / Return Rank: 65
EDGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
EDGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
EDGF Omega Ratio Rank: 58
EDGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 88
EDGF Martin Ratio Rank: 70

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. EDGF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF (BAMB) and 3EDGE Dynamic Fixed Income ETF (EDGF). 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	EDGF	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.74	1.81	-1.07
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.12	2.87	-1.75
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.13	1.37	-0.24
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.77	5.19	-4.43
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	2.27	13.35	-11.08
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. EDGF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAMB Sharpe Ratio is 0.74, which is lower than the EDGF Sharpe Ratio of 1.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAMB and EDGF, 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	EDGF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.74	1.81	-1.07
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.05	0.99	+0.06

Drawdowns

BAMB vs. EDGF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAMB drawdown since its inception was -4.48%, which is greater than EDGF's maximum drawdown of -1.62%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMB and EDGF.

Drawdown Indicators

	BAMB	EDGF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-4.48%	-1.62%	-2.86%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.37%	-0.64%	-2.73%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.38%	-0.03%	-2.35%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.00%	-0.46%	-0.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.14%	0.25%	+0.89%

Volatility

BAMB vs. EDGF - Volatility Comparison

Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF (BAMB) has a higher volatility of 1.20% compared to 3EDGE Dynamic Fixed Income ETF (EDGF) at 0.27%. This indicates that BAMB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EDGF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BAMB	EDGF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.20%	0.27%	+0.93%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.75%	1.28%	+1.47%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	3.91%	1.95%	+1.96%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	4.07%	2.35%	+1.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	4.07%	2.35%	+1.72%

BAMB vs. EDGF - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAMB has a 1.09% expense ratio, which is higher than EDGF's 0.79% expense ratio.

Dividends

BAMB vs. EDGF - Dividend Comparison

BAMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.95%, less than EDGF's 3.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BAMB Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF	2.95%	2.85%	2.90%	0.73%
EDGF 3EDGE Dynamic Fixed Income ETF	3.45%	3.61%	0.49%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BAMB and EDGF in my portfolio?

BAMB and EDGF have a correlation of 0.65, 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 EDGF?

BAMB has higher volatility (1.20%) compared to EDGF (0.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMB dropped -4.48% vs EDGF's -1.62%.

Which ETF is better, BAMB or EDGF?

On 1-year performance, EDGF leads with 3.51% vs 2.87% for BAMB. On fees, EDGF is cheaper at 0.79% per year. On volatility, EDGF has been the lower-risk option at 0.27%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BAMB or EDGF?

Over the 1-year period, EDGF has performed better with a 3.51% return vs 2.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BAMB or EDGF?

EDGF is cheaper with a 0.79% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMB.

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

EDGF has the higher dividend yield at 3.45%, compared with 2.95% for BAMB.

What is the main difference between BAMB and EDGF?

They also come from different issuers: Brookstone and 3EDGE Asset Management. Their fees differ too: 1.09% for BAMB and 0.79% for EDGF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

EDGF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.81 vs 0.74), 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.