BAMU vs. XHLF
BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) and XHLF (BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone, while XHLF is a Government Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Treasury 6 Month Duration Index. BAMU is actively managed, while XHLF is passively managed. Over the past year, BAMU returned 2.83% vs 3.75% for XHLF. Their 0.17 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. BAMU charges 1.09%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for XHLF.
Performance
BAMU vs. XHLF - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BAMU achieves a 1.52% return, which is significantly lower than XHLF's 1.99% return.
BAMU
- 1D
- 0.04%
- 1M
- 0.24%
- 6M
- 1.24%
- YTD
- 1.52%
- 1Y
- 2.83%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 3.54%
XHLF
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- 0.27%
- 6M
- 1.72%
- YTD
- 1.99%
- 1Y
- 3.75%
- 3Y*
- 4.54%
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- 4.39%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $205.15K | $225.66K | $217.36K | |
| $12.43M | $15.71M | $17.34M |
BAMU vs. XHLF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF | 1.52% | 3.21% | 4.14% | 1.20% |
XHLF BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF | 1.99% | 4.21% | 5.04% | 1.65% |
Correlation
The correlation between BAMU and XHLF is 0.07, meaning there was essentially no consistent relationship between their historical price movements. Each responded to its own set of market drivers.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most. | 0.07 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2023 | 0.17 |
The correlation between BAMU and XHLF shifts across timeframes, from 0.07 (1 year) to 0.17 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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. XHLF — Risk / Return Rank
BAMU
XHLF
BAMU vs. XHLF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) and BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF (XHLF). 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.
| BAMU | XHLF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -7.44 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -33.03 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 2.40 | 10.26 | -7.86 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 24.03 | 94.58 | -70.54 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 95.51 | 614.05 | -518.54 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
BAMU vs. XHLF - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BAMU drawdown since its inception was -0.36%, which is greater than XHLF's maximum drawdown of -0.11%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMU and XHLF.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BAMU | XHLF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -0.36% | -0.11% | -0.25% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.12% | -0.04% | -0.08% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -0.06% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.02% | 0.00% | -0.02% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.03% | 0.01% | +0.02% |
Volatility
BAMU vs. XHLF - Volatility Comparison
Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) has a higher volatility of 0.10% compared to BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF (XHLF) at 0.09%. This indicates that BAMU's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XHLF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BAMU | XHLF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.10% | 0.09% | +0.01% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.36% | 0.22% | +0.14% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.58% | 0.31% | +0.27% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 0.85% | 0.41% | +0.44% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 0.85% | 0.41% | +0.44% |
BAMU vs. XHLF - Expense Ratio Comparison
BAMU has a 1.09% expense ratio, which is higher than XHLF's 0.03% expense ratio.
Dividends
BAMU vs. XHLF - Dividend Comparison
BAMU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.04%, less than XHLF's 3.81% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF | 3.04% | 3.20% | 3.97% | 0.84% | 0.00% |
XHLF BondBloxx Bloomberg Six Month Target Duration US Treasury ETF | 3.81% | 3.98% | 4.96% | 4.50% | 0.86% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BAMU and XHLF have a correlation of 0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
BAMU has higher volatility (0.10%) compared to XHLF (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMU dropped -0.36% vs XHLF's -0.11%.
On 1-year performance, XHLF leads with 3.75% vs 2.83% for BAMU. On fees, XHLF is cheaper at 0.03% per year. Their volatility is very similar. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, XHLF has performed better with a 3.75% return vs 2.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
XHLF is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.
XHLF has the higher dividend yield at 3.81%, compared with 3.04% for BAMU.
BAMU is categorized as Ultrashort Bond, while XHLF is Government Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Brookstone and BondBloxx. Their fees differ too: 1.09% for BAMU and 0.03% for XHLF.
XHLF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (12.33 vs 4.89), 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 BAMU and XHLF
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