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

Performance

BAMU vs. EPSV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) and Harbor SMID Cap Value ETF (EPSV). 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 EPSV's 26.42% return.


BAMU

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

EPSV

1D
-0.04%
1M
7.26%
YTD
26.42%
6M
26.98%
1Y
46.19%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BAMU vs. EPSV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
BAMU
Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF
1.06%2.05%
EPSV
Harbor SMID Cap Value ETF
26.42%20.91%

Correlation

The correlation between BAMU and EPSV is -0.00, 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

-0.00

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2025

0.00

BAMU vs. EPSV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BAMU
EPSV

Financial Services

98.8%
19.1%

Basic Materials

-

4.3%

Communication Services

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

5.8%

Consumer Defensive

-

5.0%

Energy

-

6.1%

Healthcare

-

0.9%

Industrials

-

24.9%

Real Estate

-

7.5%

Technology

-

22.7%

Utilities

-

3.7%

Financial Services

BAMU
98.8%
EPSV
19.1%

Basic Materials

BAMU

-

EPSV
4.3%

Communication Services

BAMU

-

EPSV

-

Consumer Cyclical

BAMU

-

EPSV
5.8%

Consumer Defensive

BAMU

-

EPSV
5.0%

Energy

BAMU

-

EPSV
6.1%

Healthcare

BAMU

-

EPSV
0.9%

Industrials

BAMU

-

EPSV
24.9%

Real Estate

BAMU

-

EPSV
7.5%

Technology

BAMU

-

EPSV
22.7%

Utilities

BAMU

-

EPSV
3.7%

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. EPSV — 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

EPSV
EPSV Risk / Return Rank: 8383
Overall Rank
EPSV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8181
Sharpe Ratio Rank
EPSV Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
EPSV Omega Ratio Rank: 7777
Omega Ratio Rank
EPSV Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
EPSV Martin Ratio Rank: 8686
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. EPSV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) and Harbor SMID Cap Value ETF (EPSV). 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.


BAMUEPSVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+2.36

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+5.08

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

2.41

1.46

+0.95

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

24.89

5.19

+19.70

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

97.89

18.03

+79.86

BAMU vs. EPSV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAMU Sharpe Ratio is 4.98, which is higher than the EPSV Sharpe Ratio of 2.62. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAMU and EPSV, 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


BAMUEPSVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

4.98

2.62

+2.36

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

4.14

2.66

+1.48

Drawdowns

BAMU vs. EPSV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAMU drawdown since its inception was -0.36%, smaller than the maximum EPSV drawdown of -8.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMU and EPSV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BAMUEPSVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-0.36%

-8.93%

+8.57%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-0.12%

-8.93%

+8.81%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

0.00%

-0.04%

+0.04%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-0.02%

-1.67%

+1.65%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

0.03%

2.57%

-2.54%

Volatility

BAMU vs. EPSV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) is 0.07%, while Harbor SMID Cap Value ETF (EPSV) has a volatility of 6.05%. This indicates that BAMU experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than EPSV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BAMUEPSVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

0.07%

6.05%

-5.98%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

0.43%

12.80%

-12.37%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.59%

17.75%

-17.16%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

0.87%

18.14%

-17.27%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

0.87%

18.14%

-17.27%

BAMU vs. EPSV - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAMU has a 1.09% expense ratio, which is higher than EPSV's 0.88% expense ratio.


Dividends

BAMU vs. EPSV - Dividend Comparison

BAMU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.06%, more than EPSV's 2.28% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
BAMU
Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF
3.06%3.20%3.97%0.84%
EPSV
Harbor SMID Cap Value ETF
2.28%2.88%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


BAMU and EPSV have a correlation of -0.00, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

EPSV has higher volatility (6.05%) compared to BAMU (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMU dropped -0.36% vs EPSV's -8.93%.

On 1-year performance, EPSV leads with 46.19% vs 2.93% for BAMU. On fees, EPSV is cheaper at 0.88% 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, EPSV has performed better with a 46.19% return vs 2.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

EPSV is cheaper with a 0.88% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.

BAMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.06%, compared with 2.28% for EPSV.

BAMU is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while EPSV is Small Cap Value Equities. They also come from different issuers: Brookstone and Harbor. Their fees differ too: 1.09% for BAMU and 0.88% for EPSV.

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.98 vs 2.62), 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 EPSV

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