PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BAMV vs. BGIG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BAMV vs. BGIG - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with BAMV having a 10.04% return and BGIG slightly higher at 10.12%.


BAMV

1D
-0.10%
1M
0.99%
YTD
10.04%
6M
9.77%
1Y
15.31%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BGIG

1D
-0.25%
1M
-0.02%
YTD
10.12%
6M
9.82%
1Y
19.97%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BAMV vs. BGIG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023
BAMV
Brookstone Value Stock ETF
10.04%7.66%12.03%13.82%
BGIG
Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF
10.12%12.49%16.84%8.22%

Correlation

The correlation between BAMV and BGIG is 0.73, 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

0.73

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2023

0.76

The correlation between BAMV and BGIG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

BAMV vs. BGIG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BAMV
BGIG

Financial Services

28.3%
14.4%

Technology

26.0%
25.7%

Industrials

10.4%
10.3%

Healthcare

9.8%
15.2%

Communication Services

8.7%
0.8%

Energy

5.9%
10.2%

Basic Materials

4.9%
0.6%

Real Estate

2.8%
3.8%

Consumer Cyclical

2.1%
4.8%

Consumer Defensive

0.8%
6.8%

Utilities

0.3%
7.2%

Financial Services

BAMV
28.3%
BGIG
14.4%

Technology

BAMV
26.0%
BGIG
25.7%

Industrials

BAMV
10.4%
BGIG
10.3%

Healthcare

BAMV
9.8%
BGIG
15.2%

Communication Services

BAMV
8.7%
BGIG
0.8%

Energy

BAMV
5.9%
BGIG
10.2%

Basic Materials

BAMV
4.9%
BGIG
0.6%

Real Estate

BAMV
2.8%
BGIG
3.8%

Consumer Cyclical

BAMV
2.1%
BGIG
4.8%

Consumer Defensive

BAMV
0.8%
BGIG
6.8%

Utilities

BAMV
0.3%
BGIG
7.2%

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

BAMV vs. BGIG — Risk / Return Rank

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

BAMV
BAMV Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
BAMV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3939
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BAMV Sortino Ratio Rank: 3939
Sortino Ratio Rank
BAMV Omega Ratio Rank: 3636
Omega Ratio Rank
BAMV Calmar Ratio Rank: 5454
Calmar Ratio Rank
BAMV Martin Ratio Rank: 4848
Martin Ratio Rank

BGIG
BGIG Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
BGIG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BGIG Sortino Ratio Rank: 7979
Sortino Ratio Rank
BGIG Omega Ratio Rank: 7373
Omega Ratio Rank
BGIG Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
BGIG Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
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.

BAMV vs. BGIG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookstone Value Stock ETF (BAMV) and Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF (BGIG). 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.


BAMVBGIGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.93

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.28

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.23

1.40

-0.17

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.47

3.45

-0.99

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.45

13.32

-5.87

BAMV vs. BGIG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAMV Sharpe Ratio is 1.29, which is lower than the BGIG Sharpe Ratio of 2.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAMV and BGIG, 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...

Drawdowns

BAMV vs. BGIG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAMV drawdown since its inception was -14.56%, which is greater than BGIG's maximum drawdown of -13.24%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMV and BGIG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BAMVBGIGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-14.56%

-13.24%

-1.32%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.23%

-5.81%

-0.42%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.17%

-0.65%

-0.52%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.99%

-1.75%

-0.24%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.06%

1.50%

+0.56%

Volatility

BAMV vs. BGIG - Volatility Comparison

Brookstone Value Stock ETF (BAMV) has a higher volatility of 3.75% compared to Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF (BGIG) at 2.46%. This indicates that BAMV's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BGIG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BAMVBGIGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.75%

2.46%

+1.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.62%

6.74%

+1.88%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

11.90%

9.05%

+2.85%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.72%

11.90%

+1.82%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.72%

11.90%

+1.82%

BAMV vs. BGIG - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAMV has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than BGIG's 0.45% expense ratio.


Dividends

BAMV vs. BGIG - Dividend Comparison

BAMV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.27%, less than BGIG's 1.74% yield.


PositionTTM202520242023
BAMV
Brookstone Value Stock ETF
1.27%1.32%3.66%0.19%
BGIG
Bahl & Gaynor Income Growth ETF
1.74%1.89%2.02%0.78%

Frequently Asked Questions


BAMV and BGIG have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BAMV has higher volatility (3.75%) compared to BGIG (2.46%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMV dropped -14.56% vs BGIG's -13.24%.

On 1-year performance, BGIG leads with 19.97% vs 15.31% for BAMV. On fees, BGIG is cheaper at 0.45% per year. On volatility, BGIG has been the lower-risk option at 2.46%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, BGIG has performed better with a 19.97% return vs 15.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BGIG is cheaper with a 0.45% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for BAMV.

BGIG has the higher dividend yield at 1.74%, compared with 1.27% for BAMV.

They also come from different issuers: Brookstone and Bahl & Gaynor. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for BAMV and 0.45% for BGIG.

BGIG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.22 vs 1.29), 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 BAMV and BGIG

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