PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BAMU vs. BAMY
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BAMU vs. BAMY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) and Brookstone Yield ETF (BAMY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAMU achieves a 1.06% return, which is significantly lower than BAMY's 1.16% return.


BAMU

1D
0.02%
1M
0.20%
YTD
1.06%
6M
1.25%
1Y
2.93%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BAMY

1D
-0.21%
1M
0.31%
YTD
1.16%
6M
1.80%
1Y
10.68%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BAMU vs. BAMY - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
BAMU
Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF
1.06%3.21%4.14%1.16%
BAMY
Brookstone Yield ETF
1.16%12.93%10.60%5.20%

Correlation

The correlation between BAMU and BAMY is -0.11, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


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

-0.11

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 29, 2023

0.02

The correlation between BAMU and BAMY shifts across timeframes, from -0.11 (1 year) to 0.02 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

BAMU vs. BAMY - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BAMU
BAMY

Financial Services

98.8%
6.8%

Basic Materials

-

1.5%

Communication Services

-

13.0%

Consumer Cyclical

-

12.6%

Consumer Defensive

-

5.3%

Energy

-

1.5%

Healthcare

-

8.7%

Industrials

-

6.6%

Real Estate

-

1.3%

Technology

-

40.4%

Utilities

-

2.5%

Financial Services

BAMU
98.8%
BAMY
6.8%

Basic Materials

BAMU

-

BAMY
1.5%

Communication Services

BAMU

-

BAMY
13.0%

Consumer Cyclical

BAMU

-

BAMY
12.6%

Consumer Defensive

BAMU

-

BAMY
5.3%

Energy

BAMU

-

BAMY
1.5%

Healthcare

BAMU

-

BAMY
8.7%

Industrials

BAMU

-

BAMY
6.6%

Real Estate

BAMU

-

BAMY
1.3%

Technology

BAMU

-

BAMY
40.4%

Utilities

BAMU

-

BAMY
2.5%

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

BAMU vs. BAMY — Risk / Return Rank

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

BAMU
BAMU Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
BAMU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9797
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BAMU Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
BAMU Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
BAMU Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
BAMU Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
Martin Ratio Rank

BAMY
BAMY Risk / Return Rank: 7979
Overall Rank
BAMY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7171
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BAMY Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
BAMY Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
BAMY Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
BAMY Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
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.

BAMU vs. BAMY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) and Brookstone Yield ETF (BAMY). 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.


BAMUBAMYDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.65

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+5.38

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

2.41

1.49

+0.92

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

24.89

4.32

+20.57

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

97.89

19.33

+78.56

BAMU vs. BAMY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAMU Sharpe Ratio is 4.98, which is higher than the BAMY Sharpe Ratio of 2.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAMU and BAMY, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


BAMUBAMYDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.98

2.33

+2.65

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

4.14

1.87

+2.27

Drawdowns

BAMU vs. BAMY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAMU drawdown since its inception was -0.36%, smaller than the maximum BAMY drawdown of -6.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMU and BAMY.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BAMUBAMYDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-0.36%

-6.03%

+5.67%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.12%

-2.48%

+2.36%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.24%

+0.24%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.02%

-0.53%

+0.51%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.03%

0.55%

-0.52%

Volatility

BAMU vs. BAMY - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) is 0.07%, while Brookstone Yield ETF (BAMY) has a volatility of 1.09%. This indicates that BAMU experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than BAMY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BAMUBAMYDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.07%

1.09%

-1.02%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.43%

2.80%

-2.37%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.59%

4.62%

-4.03%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

0.87%

6.03%

-5.16%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

0.87%

6.03%

-5.16%

BAMU vs. BAMY - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAMU has a 1.09% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMY's 1.48% expense ratio.


Dividends

BAMU vs. BAMY - Dividend Comparison

BAMU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.06%, less than BAMY's 7.59% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
BAMU
Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF
3.06%3.20%3.97%0.84%
BAMY
Brookstone Yield ETF
7.59%7.16%8.20%1.96%

Frequently Asked Questions


BAMU and BAMY have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BAMY has higher volatility (1.09%) compared to BAMU (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMU dropped -0.36% vs BAMY's -6.03%.

On 1-year performance, BAMY leads with 10.68% vs 2.93% for BAMU. On fees, BAMU is cheaper at 1.09% per year. On volatility, BAMU has been the lower-risk option at 0.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BAMY has performed better with a 10.68% return vs 2.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BAMU is cheaper with a 1.09% expense ratio, compared with 1.48% for BAMY.

BAMY has the higher dividend yield at 7.59%, compared with 3.06% for BAMU.

BAMU is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while BAMY is Diversified Portfolio. Their fees differ too: 1.09% for BAMU and 1.48% for BAMY.

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.98 vs 2.33), 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 BAMU and BAMY

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