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

Performance

BAMG vs. BAMB - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAMG achieves a 8.87% return, which is significantly higher than BAMB's -0.89% return.


BAMG

1D
-2.21%
1M
2.19%
YTD
8.87%
6M
7.34%
1Y
24.36%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BAMB

1D
0.13%
1M
0.32%
YTD
-0.89%
6M
-0.79%
1Y
1.81%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BAMG vs. BAMB - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
BAMG
Brookstone Growth Stock ETF
8.87%17.03%24.01%11.91%
BAMB
Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF
-0.89%6.15%3.01%2.94%

Correlation

The correlation between BAMG and BAMB is 0.23, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.23

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

BAMG vs. BAMB — Risk / Return Rank

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

BAMG
BAMG Risk / Return Rank: 4646
Overall Rank
BAMG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BAMG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4848
Sortino Ratio Rank
BAMG Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
BAMG Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
BAMG Martin Ratio Rank: 4646
Martin Ratio Rank

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: 1616
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.

BAMG vs. BAMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


BAMGBAMBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+1.12

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.48

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.08

+0.20

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.87

0.54

+1.33

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.21

1.42

+5.80

BAMG vs. BAMB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAMG Sharpe Ratio is 1.60, which is higher than the BAMB Sharpe Ratio of 0.47. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAMG and BAMB, 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

BAMG vs. BAMB - Drawdown Comparison

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


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BAMGBAMBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-21.00%

-4.48%

-16.52%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.08%

-3.37%

-9.71%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.22%

-2.55%

+0.33%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.50%

-1.03%

-1.47%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.39%

1.28%

+2.11%

Volatility

BAMG vs. BAMB - Volatility Comparison

Brookstone Growth Stock ETF (BAMG) has a higher volatility of 6.44% compared to Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF (BAMB) at 1.13%. This indicates that BAMG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BAMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BAMGBAMBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

6.44%

1.13%

+5.31%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.13%

2.85%

+9.28%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.34%

3.85%

+11.49%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.18%

4.07%

+13.11%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.18%

4.07%

+13.11%

BAMG vs. BAMB - Expense Ratio Comparison

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


Dividends

BAMG vs. BAMB - Dividend Comparison

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


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


BAMG and BAMB have a correlation of 0.23, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BAMG has higher volatility (6.44%) compared to BAMB (1.13%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMG dropped -21.00% vs BAMB's -4.48%.

On 1-year performance, BAMG leads with 24.36% vs 1.81% 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 24.36% return vs 1.81%. 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.

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

BAMG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.60 vs 0.47), 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 BAMG and BAMB

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