BUFP vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

BUFP (PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BUFP is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the S&P 500, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. BUFP is passively managed, while BAMU is actively managed. Over the past year, BUFP returned 17.31% vs 2.91% for BAMU. At a correlation of -0.04, they often move in opposite directions. BUFP charges 0.50%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

BUFP vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) 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, BUFP achieves a 6.33% return, which is significantly higher than BAMU's 1.18% return.

BUFP

• 1D: 0.28%
• 1M: 0.57%
• YTD: 6.33%
• 6M: 6.42%
• 1Y: 17.31%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BAMU

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.16%
• YTD: 1.18%
• 6M: 1.23%
• 1Y: 2.91%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

BUFP vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	6.33%	12.92%	6.30%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.18%	3.21%	2.34%

Correlation

The correlation between BUFP and BAMU is -0.16, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.16
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 13, 2024	-0.04

The correlation between BUFP and BAMU shifts across timeframes, from -0.16 (1 year) to -0.04 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

BUFP vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

BUFP

BUFP Risk / Return Rank: 88
BUFP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
BUFP Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
BUFP Omega Ratio Rank: 91
BUFP Calmar Ratio Rank: 79
BUFP Martin Ratio Rank: 92

BAMU

BAMU Risk / Return Rank: 98
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) 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.

BUFP vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) 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.

	BUFP	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.72	5.01	-2.28
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.02	8.84	-4.81
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.57	2.43	-0.86
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.94	24.72	-20.78
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	21.61	97.90	-76.29

BUFP vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BUFP Sharpe Ratio is 2.72, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 5.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BUFP 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

BUFP vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BUFP drawdown since its inception was -11.98%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BUFP and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	BUFP	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-11.98%	-0.36%	-11.62%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-4.41%	-0.12%	-4.29%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.19%	0.00%	-0.19%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.99%	-0.02%	-0.97%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.80%	0.03%	+0.77%

Volatility

BUFP vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF (BUFP) has a higher volatility of 1.99% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.09%. This indicates that BUFP'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

	BUFP	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.99%	0.09%	+1.90%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.11%	0.40%	+4.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.40%	0.58%	+5.82%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	9.46%	0.87%	+8.59%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	9.46%	0.87%	+8.59%

BUFP vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

BUFP has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

BUFP vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

BUFP's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.01%, less than BAMU's 3.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	3.05%	3.20%	3.97%	0.84%
BUFP PGIM Laddered S&P 500 Buffer 12 ETF	0.01%	0.01%	0.02%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BUFP and BAMU in my portfolio?

BUFP and BAMU have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BUFP or BAMU?

BUFP has higher volatility (1.99%) compared to BAMU (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BUFP dropped -11.98% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, BUFP or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, BUFP leads with 17.31% vs 2.91% for BAMU. On fees, BUFP is cheaper at 0.50% per year. On volatility, BAMU has been the lower-risk option at 0.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BUFP or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, BUFP has performed better with a 17.31% return vs 2.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BUFP or BAMU?

BUFP is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.

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

BAMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.05%, compared with 0.01% for BUFP.

What is the main difference between BUFP and BAMU?

BUFP is categorized as Defined Outcome, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: PGIM and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for BUFP and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.01 vs 2.72), 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.