BAMV vs. BAMB

Last updated Aug 4, 2026

BAMV (Brookstone Value Stock ETF) and BAMB (Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BAMV is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Brookstone, while BAMB is a Intermediate Core Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BAMV returned 20.38% vs 0.19% for BAMB. Their 0.17 correlation means their historical movements had little consistent relationship. BAMV charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMB.

Performance

BAMV vs. BAMB - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAMV achieves a 15.50% return, which is significantly higher than BAMB's -1.31% return.

BAMV

• 1D: 0.92%
• 1M: 4.74%
• 6M: 11.74%
• YTD: 15.50%
• 1Y: 20.38%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 17.55%

BAMB

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: -0.77%
• 6M: -1.01%
• YTD: -1.31%
• 1Y: 0.19%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 3.76%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
BAMB Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF	$181.28K	$193.77K	$199.81K
BAMV Brookstone Value Stock ETF	$567.57K	$543.76K	$477.52K

BAMV vs. BAMB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BAMV Brookstone Value Stock ETF	15.50%	7.66%	12.03%	13.82%
BAMB Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF	-1.31%	6.15%	3.01%	2.94%

Correlation

The correlation between BAMV and BAMB is 0.28, which is low. Their historical price movements had little consistent relationship.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.28
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2023	0.17

The correlation between BAMV and BAMB shifts across timeframes, from 0.17 (all time) to 0.28 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

BAMV vs. BAMB — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

BAMV

BAMV Risk / Return Rank: 73
BAMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
BAMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 72
BAMV Omega Ratio Rank: 66
BAMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
BAMV Martin Ratio Rank: 75

BAMB

BAMB Risk / Return Rank: 11
BAMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 12
BAMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 10
BAMB Omega Ratio Rank: 10
BAMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 12
BAMB Martin Ratio Rank: 11

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

BAMV vs. BAMB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookstone Value Stock ETF (BAMV) and Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF (BAMB). 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	BAMB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.72	0.05	+1.67
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.49	0.10	+2.39
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.01	+0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.29	0.06	+3.23
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.26	0.13	+10.13

BAMV vs. BAMB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAMV Sharpe Ratio is 1.72, which is higher than the BAMB Sharpe Ratio of 0.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAMV and BAMB, 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. BAMB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAMV drawdown since its inception was -14.56%, which is greater than BAMB's maximum drawdown of -4.48%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMV and BAMB.

Drawdown Indicators

	BAMV	BAMB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.56%	-4.48%	-10.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.23%	-3.37%	-2.86%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-2.96%	+2.96%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.93%	-1.10%	-0.83%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.99%	1.54%	+0.45%

Volatility

BAMV vs. BAMB - Volatility Comparison

Brookstone Value Stock ETF (BAMV) has a higher volatility of 3.09% compared to Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF (BAMB) at 0.92%. This indicates that BAMV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BAMB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BAMV	BAMB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.09%	0.92%	+2.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.60%	2.89%	+5.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.92%	3.65%	+8.27%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.59%	4.05%	+9.54%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.59%	4.05%	+9.54%

BAMV vs. BAMB - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAMV has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMB's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

BAMV vs. BAMB - Dividend Comparison

BAMV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.21%, less than BAMB's 2.96% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BAMB Brookstone Intermediate Bond ETF	2.96%	2.85%	2.90%	0.73%
BAMV Brookstone Value Stock ETF	1.21%	1.32%	3.66%	0.19%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BAMV and BAMB in my portfolio?

BAMV and BAMB have a correlation of 0.28, 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 BAMB?

BAMV has higher volatility (3.09%) compared to BAMB (0.92%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMV dropped -14.56% vs BAMB's -4.48%.

Which ETF is better, BAMV or BAMB?

On 1-year performance, BAMV leads with 20.38% vs 0.19% for BAMB. On fees, BAMV is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, BAMB has been the lower-risk option at 0.92%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BAMV or BAMB?

Over the 1-year period, BAMV has performed better with a 20.38% return vs 0.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BAMV or BAMB?

BAMV is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMB.

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

BAMB has the higher dividend yield at 2.96%, compared with 1.21% for BAMV.

What is the main difference between BAMV and BAMB?

BAMV is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while BAMB is Intermediate Core Bond. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for BAMV and 1.09% for BAMB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.72 vs 0.05), 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.