BAMD vs. IGF
BAMD (Brookstone Dividend Stock ETF) and IGF (iShares Global Infrastructure ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BAMD is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Brookstone, while IGF is a Industrials Equities fund tracking the S&P Global Infrastructure Index. BAMD is actively managed, while IGF is passively managed. Over the past year, BAMD returned 7.69% vs 15.30% for IGF. A 0.66 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BAMD charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.39%/yr for IGF.
Performance
BAMD vs. IGF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
The year-to-date returns for both stocks are quite close, with BAMD having a 8.13% return and IGF slightly lower at 8.05%.
BAMD
- 1D
- -0.67%
- 1M
- 0.36%
- YTD
- 8.13%
- 6M
- 8.26%
- 1Y
- 7.69%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IGF
- 1D
- -0.57%
- 1M
- -1.85%
- YTD
- 8.05%
- 6M
- 7.91%
- 1Y
- 15.30%
- 3Y*
- 15.91%
- 5Y*
- 10.15%
- 10Y*
- 8.29%
BAMD vs. IGF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BAMD Brookstone Dividend Stock ETF | 8.13% | -1.33% | 19.76% | 10.73% |
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF | 8.05% | 21.31% | 14.81% | 10.32% |
Correlation
The correlation between BAMD and IGF is 0.58, 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 | 0.58 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 29, 2023 | 0.66 |
The correlation between BAMD and IGF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.58 to 0.66 - a consistent structural relationship.
BAMD vs. IGF - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
BAMD
IGF
Financial Services
-
Energy
Technology
-
Consumer Defensive
-
Utilities
Industrials
Healthcare
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
Basic Materials
-
Real Estate
Financial Services
BAMD
IGF
-
Energy
BAMD
IGF
Technology
BAMD
IGF
-
Consumer Defensive
BAMD
IGF
-
Utilities
BAMD
IGF
Industrials
BAMD
IGF
Healthcare
BAMD
IGF
-
Communication Services
BAMD
IGF
-
Consumer Cyclical
BAMD
IGF
-
Basic Materials
BAMD
IGF
-
Real Estate
BAMD
IGF
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
BAMD vs. IGF — Risk / Return Rank
BAMD
IGF
BAMD vs. IGF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookstone Dividend Stock ETF (BAMD) and iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF). 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.
| BAMD | IGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.75 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.01 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.13 | 1.26 | -0.13 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.11 | 2.62 | -1.51 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 2.91 | 8.05 | -5.15 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| BAMD | IGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.72 | 1.47 | -0.75 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.73 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.49 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.04 | 0.24 | +0.81 |
Drawdowns
BAMD vs. IGF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BAMD drawdown since its inception was -15.91%, smaller than the maximum IGF drawdown of -58.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMD and IGF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BAMD | IGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -15.91% | -58.33% | +42.42% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.99% | -5.87% | -1.12% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -14.28% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -20.83% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -42.11% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.45% | -4.43% | +2.98% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.29% | -11.87% | +7.58% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.65% | 1.90% | +0.75% |
Volatility
BAMD vs. IGF - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Brookstone Dividend Stock ETF (BAMD) is 2.47%, while iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) has a volatility of 3.68%. This indicates that BAMD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IGF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BAMD | IGF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.47% | 3.68% | -1.21% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 6.83% | 8.59% | -1.76% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.77% | 10.49% | +0.28% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.35% | 13.99% | -0.64% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.35% | 16.83% | -3.48% |
BAMD vs. IGF - Expense Ratio Comparison
BAMD has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than IGF's 0.39% expense ratio.
Dividends
BAMD vs. IGF - Dividend Comparison
BAMD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.56%, more than IGF's 2.98% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BAMD Brookstone Dividend Stock ETF | 3.56% | 3.86% | 4.21% | 0.70% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
IGF iShares Global Infrastructure ETF | 2.98% | 3.23% | 3.21% | 3.36% | 2.67% | 2.42% | 2.33% | 3.27% | 3.52% | 2.95% | 2.98% | 3.25% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BAMD and IGF have a correlation of 0.58, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IGF has higher volatility (3.68%) compared to BAMD (2.47%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMD dropped -15.91% vs IGF's -58.33%.
On 1-year performance, IGF leads with 15.30% vs 7.69% for BAMD. On fees, IGF is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, BAMD has been the lower-risk option at 2.47%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, IGF has performed better with a 15.30% return vs 7.69%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IGF is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BAMD.
BAMD has the higher dividend yield at 3.56%, compared with 2.98% for IGF.
BAMD is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while IGF is Industrials Equities. They also come from different issuers: Brookstone and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for BAMD and 0.39% for IGF.
IGF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.47 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.
Find the right allocation for BAMD and IGF
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