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

Performance

BAMO vs. BAMV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Brookstone Opportunities ETF (BAMO) and Brookstone Value Stock ETF (BAMV). 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 BAMV's 10.15% return.


BAMO

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

BAMV

1D
0.13%
1M
1.10%
YTD
10.15%
6M
9.60%
1Y
15.91%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BAMO vs. BAMV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
BAMO
Brookstone Opportunities ETF
5.78%9.16%14.39%7.75%
BAMV
Brookstone Value Stock ETF
10.15%7.66%12.03%13.82%

Correlation

The correlation between BAMO and BAMV is 0.74, 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

0.74

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

0.68

The correlation between BAMO and BAMV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.68 to 0.74 - 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. BAMV — 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

BAMV
BAMV Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
BAMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3939
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BAMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
BAMV Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
BAMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
BAMV Martin Ratio Rank: 4747
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. BAMV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


BAMOBAMVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.77

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+1.11

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.40

1.23

+0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.60

2.57

+0.03

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.87

7.75

+4.12

BAMO vs. BAMV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAMO Sharpe Ratio is 2.11, which is higher than the BAMV Sharpe Ratio of 1.34. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAMO and BAMV, 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. BAMV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAMO drawdown since its inception was -12.72%, smaller than the maximum BAMV drawdown of -14.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMO and BAMV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BAMOBAMVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-12.72%

-14.56%

+1.84%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-5.45%

-6.23%

+0.78%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.55%

-1.07%

+0.52%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.26%

-1.99%

+0.73%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.19%

2.06%

-0.87%

Volatility

BAMO vs. BAMV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Brookstone Opportunities ETF (BAMO) is 2.54%, while Brookstone Value Stock ETF (BAMV) has a volatility of 3.76%. This indicates that BAMO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BAMV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BAMOBAMVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.54%

3.76%

-1.22%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

5.83%

8.63%

-2.80%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

6.72%

11.93%

-5.21%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

9.58%

13.73%

-4.15%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

9.58%

13.73%

-4.15%

BAMO vs. BAMV - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAMO has a 1.30% expense ratio, which is higher than BAMV's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

BAMO vs. BAMV - Dividend Comparison

BAMO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.46%, more than BAMV's 1.27% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
BAMO
Brookstone Opportunities ETF
1.46%1.54%1.58%0.48%
BAMV
Brookstone Value Stock ETF
1.27%1.32%3.66%0.19%

Frequently Asked Questions


BAMO and BAMV have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BAMV has higher volatility (3.76%) compared to BAMO (2.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMO dropped -12.72% vs BAMV's -14.56%.

On 1-year performance, BAMV leads with 15.91% vs 14.10% for BAMO. On fees, BAMV is cheaper at 0.95% 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, BAMV has performed better with a 15.91% return vs 14.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BAMV is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.30% for BAMO.

BAMO has the higher dividend yield at 1.46%, compared with 1.27% for BAMV.

BAMO is categorized as Diversified Portfolio, while BAMV is Large Cap Value Equities. Their fees differ too: 1.30% for BAMO and 0.95% for BAMV.

BAMO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.11 vs 1.34), 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 BAMV

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