BAMO vs. AOA
BAMO (Brookstone Opportunities ETF) and AOA (iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. BAMO is actively managed, while AOA is passively managed. Over the past year, BAMO returned 12.94% vs 20.10% for AOA. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BAMO charges 1.30%/yr vs 0.15%/yr for AOA.
Performance
BAMO vs. AOA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BAMO achieves a 6.83% return, which is significantly lower than AOA's 10.03% return.
BAMO
- 1D
- 0.30%
- 1M
- 1.48%
- 6M
- 5.41%
- YTD
- 6.83%
- 1Y
- 12.94%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
AOA
- 1D
- 0.33%
- 1M
- 1.04%
- 6M
- 7.80%
- YTD
- 10.03%
- 1Y
- 20.10%
- 3Y*
- 16.74%
- 5Y*
- 8.96%
- 10Y*
- 10.38%
BAMO vs. AOA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BAMO Brookstone Opportunities ETF | 6.83% | 9.16% | 14.39% | 7.75% |
AOA iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF | 10.03% | 19.59% | 13.55% | 10.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between BAMO and AOA 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 | 0.91 |
The correlation between BAMO and AOA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.
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
BAMO vs. AOA — Risk / Return Rank
BAMO
AOA
BAMO vs. AOA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookstone Opportunities ETF (BAMO) and iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF (AOA). 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.
| BAMO | AOA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.14 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +0.31 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 1.32 | +0.03 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.32 | 2.39 | -0.06 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 10.55 | 10.26 | +0.30 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BAMO vs. AOA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BAMO drawdown since its inception was -12.72%, smaller than the maximum AOA drawdown of -28.38%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMO and AOA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BAMO | AOA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -12.72% | -28.38% | +15.66% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -5.45% | -8.20% | +2.75% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -12.94% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -23.62% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -28.38% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.41% | +0.41% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.24% | -4.04% | +2.80% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.20% | 1.91% | -0.71% |
Volatility
BAMO vs. AOA - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Brookstone Opportunities ETF (BAMO) is 2.24%, while iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF (AOA) has a volatility of 3.78%. This indicates that BAMO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than AOA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BAMO | AOA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 2.24% | 3.78% | -1.54% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 5.83% | 9.42% | -3.59% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 6.73% | 11.24% | -4.51% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 9.52% | 13.08% | -3.56% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 9.52% | 13.48% | -3.96% |
BAMO vs. AOA - Expense Ratio Comparison
BAMO has a 1.30% expense ratio, which is higher than AOA's 0.15% expense ratio.
Dividends
BAMO vs. AOA - Dividend Comparison
BAMO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.45%, less than AOA's 2.11% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AOA iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF | 2.11% | 2.18% | 2.30% | 2.22% | 2.10% | 1.67% | 1.71% | 2.50% | 2.37% | 5.09% | 2.26% | 2.15% |
BAMO Brookstone Opportunities ETF | 1.45% | 1.54% | 1.58% | 0.48% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.92, BAMO and AOA 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.
AOA has higher volatility (3.78%) compared to BAMO (2.24%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMO dropped -12.72% vs AOA's -28.38%.
On 1-year performance, AOA leads with 20.10% vs 12.94% for BAMO. On fees, AOA is cheaper at 0.15% per year. On volatility, BAMO has been the lower-risk option at 2.24%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, AOA has performed better with a 20.10% return vs 12.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
AOA is cheaper with a 0.15% expense ratio, compared with 1.30% for BAMO.
AOA has the higher dividend yield at 2.11%, compared with 1.45% for BAMO.
They also come from different issuers: Brookstone and iShares. Their fees differ too: 1.30% for BAMO and 0.15% for AOA.
BAMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.88 vs 1.74), 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.
Find the right allocation for BAMO and AOA
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