BAMV vs. BAMA

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

BAMV (Brookstone Value Stock ETF) and BAMA (Brookstone Active ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BAMV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Brookstone, while BAMA is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BAMV returned 15.91% vs 20.01% for BAMA. A 0.65 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BAMV charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.15%/yr for BAMA.

Performance

BAMV vs. BAMA - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAMV achieves a 10.15% return, which is significantly higher than BAMA's 8.30% return.

BAMV

• 1D: 0.13%
• 1M: 1.10%
• YTD: 10.15%
• 6M: 9.60%
• 1Y: 15.91%
• 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)

BAMV vs. BAMA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BAMV Brookstone Value Stock ETF	10.15%	7.66%	12.03%	13.82%
BAMA Brookstone Active ETF	8.30%	12.61%	14.99%	8.02%

Correlation

The correlation between BAMV and BAMA is 0.60, 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	0.60
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 28, 2023	0.65

The correlation between BAMV and BAMA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.60 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BAMV vs. BAMA — Risk / Return Rank

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

BAMV

BAMV Risk / Return Rank: 43
BAMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 39
BAMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
BAMV Omega Ratio Rank: 36
BAMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
BAMV Martin Ratio Rank: 47

BAMA

BAMA Risk / Return Rank: 64
BAMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
BAMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
BAMA Omega Ratio Rank: 67
BAMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
BAMA Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

BAMV vs. BAMA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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

	BAMV	BAMA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.34	2.04	-0.69
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.96	2.90	-0.94
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.39	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.57	2.73	-0.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.75	12.03	-4.29

BAMV vs. BAMA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAMV Sharpe Ratio is 1.34, which is lower than the BAMA Sharpe Ratio of 2.04. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAMV 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.

Drawdowns

BAMV vs. BAMA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAMV drawdown since its inception was -14.56%, which is greater than BAMA's maximum drawdown of -12.27%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMV and BAMA.

Drawdown Indicators

	BAMV	BAMA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.56%	-12.27%	-2.29%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.23%	-7.35%	+1.12%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.07%	-1.05%	-0.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.99%	-1.27%	-0.72%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.06%	1.67%	+0.39%

Volatility

BAMV vs. BAMA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Brookstone Value Stock ETF (BAMV) is 3.76%, while Brookstone Active ETF (BAMA) has a volatility of 4.27%. This indicates that BAMV 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.

Volatility by Period

	BAMV	BAMA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.76%	4.27%	-0.51%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.63%	8.56%	+0.07%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.93%	9.89%	+2.04%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.73%	10.40%	+3.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.73%	10.40%	+3.33%

BAMV vs. BAMA - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAMV has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMA's 1.15% expense ratio.

Dividends

BAMV vs. BAMA - Dividend Comparison

BAMV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.27%, less than BAMA's 1.31% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BAMA Brookstone Active ETF	1.31%	1.54%	1.49%	0.45%
BAMV Brookstone Value Stock ETF	1.27%	1.32%	3.66%	0.19%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BAMV and BAMA in my portfolio?

BAMV and BAMA have a correlation of 0.60, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BAMV or BAMA?

BAMA has higher volatility (4.27%) compared to BAMV (3.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMV dropped -14.56% vs BAMA's -12.27%.

Which ETF is better, BAMV or BAMA?

On 1-year performance, BAMA leads with 20.01% vs 15.91% for BAMV. On fees, BAMV is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, BAMV has been the lower-risk option at 3.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BAMV or BAMA?

Over the 1-year period, BAMA has performed better with a 20.01% return vs 15.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BAMV or BAMA?

BAMV is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.15% for BAMA.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BAMV or BAMA?

BAMA has the higher dividend yield at 1.31%, compared with 1.27% for BAMV.

What is the main difference between BAMV and BAMA?

BAMV is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while BAMA is Diversified Portfolio. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for BAMV and 1.15% for BAMA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.04 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.