BNGE vs. BAMU

Last updated Aug 6, 2026

BNGE (First Trust S-Network Streaming and Gaming ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BNGE is a Technology Equities fund tracking the S-Network Streaming & Gaming Index, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. BNGE is passively managed, while BAMU is actively managed. Over the past year, BNGE returned -16.48% vs 2.77% for BAMU. Their -0.02 correlation means they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. BNGE charges 0.70%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

BNGE vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust S-Network Streaming and Gaming ETF (BNGE) and Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BNGE achieves a -16.13% return, which is significantly lower than BAMU's 1.52% return.

BNGE

• 1D: -1.16%
• 1M: -0.74%
• 6M: -4.84%
• YTD: -16.13%
• 1Y: -16.48%
• 3Y*: 12.35%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 6.35%

BAMU

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.24%
• 6M: 1.30%
• YTD: 1.52%
• 1Y: 2.77%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 3.54%

*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)
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	$141.23K	$194.28K	$204.39K
BNGE First Trust S-Network Streaming and Gaming ETF	$11.55K	$38.53K	$25.93K

BNGE vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
BNGE First Trust S-Network Streaming and Gaming ETF	-16.13%	35.18%	19.23%	15.57%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.52%	3.21%	4.14%	1.20%

Correlation

The correlation between BNGE and BAMU is -0.14, meaning they have often moved in opposite directions in the past. This relationship can weaken or reverse as market conditions change.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	-0.14
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2023	-0.02

The correlation between BNGE and BAMU shifts across timeframes, from -0.14 (1 year) to -0.02 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

BNGE vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

BNGE

BNGE Risk / Return Rank: 3
BNGE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
BNGE Sortino Ratio Rank: 3
BNGE Omega Ratio Rank: 3
BNGE Calmar Ratio Rank: 4
BNGE Martin Ratio Rank: 4

BAMU

BAMU Risk / Return Rank: 99
BAMU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
BAMU Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
BAMU Omega Ratio Rank: 98
BAMU Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
BAMU Martin Ratio Rank: 99

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.

BNGE vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust S-Network Streaming and Gaming ETF (BNGE) and Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU). 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.

	BNGE	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.91	4.83	-5.74
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.21	8.44	-9.65
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.86	2.39	-1.53
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.59	23.52	-24.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.97	96.94	-97.91

BNGE vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BNGE Sharpe Ratio is -0.91, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 4.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BNGE and BAMU, 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

BNGE vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BNGE drawdown since its inception was -40.54%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BNGE and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	BNGE	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.54%	-0.36%	-40.18%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-27.88%	-0.12%	-27.76%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.88%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-22.72%	0.00%	-22.72%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.18%	-0.02%	-14.16%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	17.05%	0.03%	+17.02%

Volatility

BNGE vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

First Trust S-Network Streaming and Gaming ETF (BNGE) has a higher volatility of 5.66% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.10%. This indicates that BNGE's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BAMU based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BNGE	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.66%	0.10%	+5.56%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	14.12%	0.35%	+13.77%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.10%	0.58%	+17.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.94%	0.85%	+24.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.94%	0.85%	+24.09%

BNGE vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

BNGE has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

BNGE vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

BNGE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.38%, less than BAMU's 3.04% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	3.04%	3.20%	3.97%	0.84%	0.00%
BNGE First Trust S-Network Streaming and Gaming ETF	0.38%	0.89%	0.01%	0.81%	0.59%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BNGE and BAMU in my portfolio?

BNGE and BAMU have a correlation of -0.14, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BNGE or BAMU?

BNGE has higher volatility (5.66%) compared to BAMU (0.10%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BNGE dropped -40.54% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, BNGE or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, BAMU leads with 2.77% vs -16.48% for BNGE. On fees, BNGE is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, BAMU has been the lower-risk option at 0.10%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BNGE or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, BAMU has performed better with a 2.77% return vs -16.48%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BNGE or BAMU?

BNGE is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BNGE or BAMU?

BAMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.04%, compared with 0.38% for BNGE.

What is the main difference between BNGE and BAMU?

BNGE is categorized as Technology Equities, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for BNGE and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.83 vs -0.91), 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.