BAMG vs. CCOR

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

BAMG (Brookstone Growth Stock ETF) and CCOR (Core Alternative ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BAMG returned 24.36% vs -3.86% for CCOR. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. BAMG charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for CCOR.

Performance

BAMG vs. CCOR - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAMG achieves a 8.87% return, which is significantly higher than CCOR's -2.72% return.

BAMG

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

CCOR

• 1D: 1.37%
• 1M: -0.73%
• YTD: -2.72%
• 6M: -2.94%
• 1Y: -3.86%
• 3Y*: -1.69%
• 5Y*: -1.97%
• 10Y*: —

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

BAMG vs. CCOR - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BAMG Brookstone Growth Stock ETF	8.87%	17.03%	24.01%	11.91%
CCOR Core Alternative ETF	-2.72%	3.52%	-5.70%	-1.53%

Correlation

The correlation between BAMG and CCOR is 0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.04
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2023	-0.04

BAMG vs. CCOR - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BAMG	CCOR
Technology	41.8%	15.6%
Healthcare	11.8%	11.2%
Communication Services	10.8%	8.3%
Financial Services	9.5%	18.2%
Industrials	9.0%	9.1%
Consumer Defensive	7.6%	7.0%
Consumer Cyclical	6.6%	8.8%
Utilities	1.7%	6.2%
Basic Materials	0.7%	4.9%
Energy	0.5%	7.9%
Real Estate	-	2.8%

Return for Risk

BAMG vs. CCOR — Risk / Return Rank

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

BAMG

BAMG Risk / Return Rank: 46
BAMG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 50
BAMG Sortino Ratio Rank: 48
BAMG Omega Ratio Rank: 47
BAMG Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
BAMG Martin Ratio Rank: 46

CCOR

CCOR Risk / Return Rank: 5
CCOR Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5
CCOR Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
CCOR Omega Ratio Rank: 4
CCOR Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
CCOR Martin Ratio Rank: 5

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. CCOR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookstone Growth Stock ETF (BAMG) and Core Alternative ETF (CCOR). 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.

	BAMG	CCOR	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.60	-0.51	+2.11
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.20	-0.66	+2.87
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	0.92	+0.36
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.87	-0.44	+2.31
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.21	-0.94	+8.16

BAMG vs. CCOR - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAMG Sharpe Ratio is 1.60, which is higher than the CCOR Sharpe Ratio of -0.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAMG and CCOR, 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

BAMG vs. CCOR - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAMG drawdown since its inception was -21.00%, smaller than the maximum CCOR drawdown of -22.99%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMG and CCOR.

Drawdown Indicators

	BAMG	CCOR	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.00%	-22.99%	+1.99%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.08%	-8.79%	-4.29%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-12.31%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-22.99%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.22%	-19.21%	+16.99%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.50%	-7.35%	+4.85%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.39%	4.10%	-0.71%

Volatility

BAMG vs. CCOR - Volatility Comparison

Brookstone Growth Stock ETF (BAMG) has a higher volatility of 6.44% compared to Core Alternative ETF (CCOR) at 3.51%. This indicates that BAMG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than CCOR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BAMG	CCOR	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.44%	3.51%	+2.93%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.13%	5.62%	+6.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.34%	7.56%	+7.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.18%	11.15%	+6.03%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.18%	10.77%	+6.41%

BAMG vs. CCOR - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

BAMG vs. CCOR - Dividend Comparison

BAMG has not paid dividends to shareholders, while CCOR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.02%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BAMG Brookstone Growth Stock ETF	0.00%	0.00%	1.24%	0.12%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
CCOR Core Alternative ETF	1.02%	1.07%	1.18%	1.21%	1.11%	1.02%	1.50%	0.73%	1.53%	0.89%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BAMG and CCOR in my portfolio?

BAMG and CCOR have a correlation of 0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BAMG or CCOR?

BAMG has higher volatility (6.44%) compared to CCOR (3.51%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMG dropped -21.00% vs CCOR's -22.99%.

Which ETF is better, BAMG or CCOR?

On 1-year performance, BAMG leads with 24.36% vs -3.86% for CCOR. On fees, BAMG is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, CCOR has been the lower-risk option at 3.51%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BAMG or CCOR?

Over the 1-year period, BAMG has performed better with a 24.36% return vs -3.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BAMG or CCOR?

BAMG is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for CCOR.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BAMG or CCOR?

CCOR has the higher dividend yield at 1.02%, compared with 0.00% for BAMG.

What is the main difference between BAMG and CCOR?

They also come from different issuers: Brookstone and Core Alternative Capital. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for BAMG and 1.09% for CCOR.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.60 vs -0.51), 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.