PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BAMO vs. BAMA
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BAMO vs. BAMA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Brookstone Opportunities ETF (BAMO) and Brookstone Active ETF (BAMA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAMO achieves a 5.78% return, which is significantly lower than BAMA's 8.30% return.


BAMO

1D
-0.16%
1M
0.53%
YTD
5.78%
6M
5.50%
1Y
14.10%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BAMA

1D
-0.40%
1M
1.09%
YTD
8.30%
6M
8.31%
1Y
20.01%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BAMO vs. BAMA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
BAMO
Brookstone Opportunities ETF
5.78%9.16%14.39%7.75%
BAMA
Brookstone Active ETF
8.30%12.61%14.99%8.02%

Correlation

The correlation between BAMO and BAMA is 0.91, 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

0.91

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 28, 2023

0.94

The correlation between BAMO and BAMA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.94 - 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. BAMA — Risk / Return Rank

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

BAMO
BAMO Risk / Return Rank: 6666
Overall Rank
BAMO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6767
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BAMO Sortino Ratio Rank: 7171
Sortino Ratio Rank
BAMO Omega Ratio Rank: 7171
Omega Ratio Rank
BAMO Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
BAMO Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank

BAMA
BAMA Risk / Return Rank: 6464
Overall Rank
BAMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6464
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BAMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
BAMA Omega Ratio Rank: 6767
Omega Ratio Rank
BAMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 5757
Calmar Ratio Rank
BAMA Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
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.

BAMO vs. BAMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookstone Opportunities ETF (BAMO) and Brookstone Active ETF (BAMA). 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.


BAMOBAMADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.07

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.17

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.40

1.39

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.60

2.73

-0.14

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.87

12.03

-0.17

BAMO vs. BAMA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAMO Sharpe Ratio is 2.11, which is comparable to the BAMA Sharpe Ratio of 2.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAMO and BAMA, 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

BAMO vs. BAMA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAMO drawdown since its inception was -12.72%, roughly equal to the maximum BAMA drawdown of -12.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMO and BAMA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BAMOBAMADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-12.72%

-12.27%

-0.45%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.45%

-7.35%

+1.90%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.55%

-1.05%

+0.50%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.26%

-1.27%

+0.01%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.19%

1.67%

-0.48%

Volatility

BAMO vs. BAMA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Brookstone Opportunities ETF (BAMO) is 2.54%, while Brookstone Active ETF (BAMA) has a volatility of 4.27%. This indicates that BAMO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BAMA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BAMOBAMADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.54%

4.27%

-1.73%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.83%

8.56%

-2.73%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.72%

9.89%

-3.17%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.58%

10.40%

-0.82%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.58%

10.40%

-0.82%

BAMO vs. BAMA - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAMO has a 1.30% expense ratio, which is higher than BAMA's 1.15% expense ratio.


Dividends

BAMO vs. BAMA - Dividend Comparison

BAMO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.46%, more than BAMA's 1.31% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
BAMA
Brookstone Active ETF
1.31%1.54%1.49%0.45%
BAMO
Brookstone Opportunities ETF
1.46%1.54%1.58%0.48%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.91, BAMO and BAMA 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.

BAMA has higher volatility (4.27%) compared to BAMO (2.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMO dropped -12.72% vs BAMA's -12.27%.

On 1-year performance, BAMA leads with 20.01% vs 14.10% for BAMO. On fees, BAMA is cheaper at 1.15% per year. On volatility, BAMO has been the lower-risk option at 2.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BAMA has performed better with a 20.01% return vs 14.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BAMA is cheaper with a 1.15% expense ratio, compared with 1.30% for BAMO.

BAMO has the higher dividend yield at 1.46%, compared with 1.31% for BAMA.

Their fees differ too: 1.30% for BAMO and 1.15% for BAMA.

BAMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 2.04), 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 BAMO and BAMA

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