EWC vs. BAMU
EWC (iShares MSCI Canada ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - EWC is a Canada Equities fund tracking the MSCI Canada Index, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. EWC is passively managed, while BAMU is actively managed. Over the past year, EWC returned 30.11% vs 2.91% for BAMU. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. EWC charges 0.49%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.
Performance
EWC vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, EWC achieves a 7.85% return, which is significantly higher than BAMU's 1.18% return.
EWC
- 1D
- 0.03%
- 1M
- -0.59%
- YTD
- 7.85%
- 6M
- 7.37%
- 1Y
- 30.11%
- 3Y*
- 21.90%
- 5Y*
- 11.28%
- 10Y*
- 11.42%
BAMU
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.16%
- YTD
- 1.18%
- 6M
- 1.23%
- 1Y
- 2.91%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
EWC vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
EWC iShares MSCI Canada ETF | 7.85% | 35.92% | 12.38% | 10.77% |
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF | 1.18% | 3.21% | 4.14% | 1.20% |
Correlation
The correlation between EWC and BAMU is -0.09, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.09 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2023 | -0.01 |
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
EWC vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank
EWC
BAMU
EWC vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Canada ETF (EWC) 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.
| EWC | BAMU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -2.91 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -6.09 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.36 | 2.43 | -1.07 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.55 | 24.72 | -21.16 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.40 | 97.90 | -83.50 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
EWC vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum EWC drawdown since its inception was -60.75%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for EWC and BAMU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| EWC | BAMU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -60.75% | -0.36% | -60.39% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -8.51% | -0.12% | -8.39% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -12.97% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.81% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -42.66% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -2.18% | 0.00% | -2.18% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -13.12% | -0.02% | -13.10% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.10% | 0.03% | +2.07% |
Volatility
EWC vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison
iShares MSCI Canada ETF (EWC) has a higher volatility of 4.36% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.09%. This indicates that EWC'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.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| EWC | BAMU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 4.36% | 0.09% | +4.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.42% | 0.40% | +11.02% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 14.46% | 0.58% | +13.88% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.29% | 0.87% | +16.42% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.74% | 0.87% | +17.87% |
EWC vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison
EWC has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.
Dividends
EWC vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison
EWC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.30%, less than BAMU's 3.05% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF | 3.05% | 3.20% | 3.97% | 0.84% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
EWC iShares MSCI Canada ETF | 1.30% | 1.45% | 2.23% | 2.27% | 2.34% | 1.85% | 2.09% | 2.16% | 2.65% | 1.97% | 1.75% | 2.34% |
Frequently Asked Questions
EWC and BAMU have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
EWC has higher volatility (4.36%) compared to BAMU (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, EWC dropped -60.75% vs BAMU's -0.36%.
On 1-year performance, EWC leads with 30.11% vs 2.91% for BAMU. On fees, EWC is cheaper at 0.49% 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.
Over the 1-year period, EWC has performed better with a 30.11% return vs 2.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
EWC is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.
BAMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.05%, compared with 1.30% for EWC.
EWC is categorized as Canada Equities, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for EWC and 1.09% for BAMU.
BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.01 vs 2.10), 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.
Find the right allocation for EWC and BAMU
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