BAMY vs. RPHS

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

BAMY (Brookstone Yield ETF) and RPHS (Regents Park Hedged Market Strategy ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, BAMY returned 8.39% vs 13.51% for RPHS. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BAMY charges 1.48%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for RPHS.

Performance

BAMY vs. RPHS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Brookstone Yield ETF (BAMY) and Regents Park Hedged Market Strategy ETF (RPHS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BAMY achieves a 1.64% return, which is significantly lower than RPHS's 5.19% return.

BAMY

• 1D: -0.03%
• 1M: 0.08%
• 6M: 1.10%
• YTD: 1.64%
• 1Y: 8.39%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

RPHS

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -0.63%
• 6M: 4.43%
• YTD: 5.19%
• 1Y: 13.51%
• 3Y*: 13.17%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BAMY vs. RPHS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BAMY Brookstone Yield ETF	1.64%	12.93%	10.60%	5.20%
RPHS Regents Park Hedged Market Strategy ETF	5.19%	11.74%	17.84%	8.77%

Correlation

The correlation between BAMY and RPHS is 0.74, 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	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 28, 2023	0.73

The correlation between BAMY and RPHS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BAMY vs. RPHS — Risk / Return Rank

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

BAMY

BAMY Risk / Return Rank: 80
BAMY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
BAMY Sortino Ratio Rank: 76
BAMY Omega Ratio Rank: 82
BAMY Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
BAMY Martin Ratio Rank: 88

RPHS

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

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.

BAMY vs. RPHS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Brookstone Yield ETF (BAMY) and Regents Park Hedged Market Strategy ETF (RPHS). 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.

	BAMY	RPHS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.87	1.25	+0.63
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.71	1.78	+0.93
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.39	1.23	+0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.40	1.68	+1.71
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.12	6.35	+8.77

BAMY vs. RPHS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BAMY Sharpe Ratio is 1.87, which is higher than the RPHS Sharpe Ratio of 1.25. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BAMY and RPHS, 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

BAMY vs. RPHS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BAMY drawdown since its inception was -6.03%, smaller than the maximum RPHS drawdown of -16.51%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BAMY and RPHS.

Drawdown Indicators

	BAMY	RPHS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-6.03%	-16.51%	+10.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-2.48%	-7.81%	+5.33%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-10.84%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.13%	-1.94%	+1.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.52%	-6.21%	+5.69%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.56%	2.07%	-1.51%

Volatility

BAMY vs. RPHS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Brookstone Yield ETF (BAMY) is 0.64%, while Regents Park Hedged Market Strategy ETF (RPHS) has a volatility of 2.90%. This indicates that BAMY experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RPHS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BAMY	RPHS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.64%	2.90%	-2.26%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	2.78%	7.69%	-4.91%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.51%	10.57%	-6.06%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	5.93%	11.39%	-5.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	5.93%	11.39%	-5.46%

BAMY vs. RPHS - Expense Ratio Comparison

BAMY has a 1.48% expense ratio, which is higher than RPHS's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

BAMY vs. RPHS - Dividend Comparison

BAMY's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.55%, while RPHS has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BAMY Brookstone Yield ETF	7.55%	7.16%	8.20%	1.96%	0.00%
RPHS Regents Park Hedged Market Strategy ETF	34.69%	11.13%	3.68%	5.23%	1.29%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BAMY and RPHS in my portfolio?

BAMY and RPHS have a correlation of 0.74, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BAMY or RPHS?

RPHS has higher volatility (2.90%) compared to BAMY (0.64%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BAMY dropped -6.03% vs RPHS's -16.51%.

Which ETF is better, BAMY or RPHS?

On 1-year performance, RPHS leads with 13.51% vs 8.39% for BAMY. On fees, RPHS is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, BAMY has been the lower-risk option at 0.64%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BAMY or RPHS?

Over the 1-year period, RPHS has performed better with a 13.51% return vs 8.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BAMY or RPHS?

RPHS is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.48% for BAMY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BAMY or RPHS?

RPHS has the higher dividend yield at 34.69%, compared with 7.55% for BAMY.

What is the main difference between BAMY and RPHS?

They also come from different issuers: Brookstone and Regents Park. Their fees differ too: 1.48% for BAMY and 0.75% for RPHS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.87 vs 1.25), 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.