FTHF vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

FTHF (First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FTHF is a Emerging Markets Diversified fund tracking the Emerging Markets Human Flourishing Index, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. FTHF is passively managed, while BAMU is actively managed. Over the past year, FTHF returned 99.98% vs 2.87% for BAMU. At a correlation of -0.09, they often move in opposite directions. FTHF charges 0.75%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

FTHF vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF (FTHF) 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, FTHF achieves a 48.98% return, which is significantly higher than BAMU's 1.18% return.

FTHF

• 1D: -6.80%
• 1M: 6.57%
• YTD: 48.98%
• 6M: 51.53%
• 1Y: 99.98%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BAMU

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.16%
• YTD: 1.18%
• 6M: 1.29%
• 1Y: 2.87%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FTHF vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
FTHF First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF	48.98%	65.30%	-8.14%	18.14%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.18%	3.21%	4.14%	0.82%

Correlation

The correlation between FTHF 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 Oct 31, 2023	-0.09

Return for Risk

FTHF vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

FTHF

FTHF Risk / Return Rank: 87
FTHF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 89
FTHF Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
FTHF Omega Ratio Rank: 89
FTHF Calmar Ratio Rank: 93
FTHF Martin Ratio Rank: 86

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.

FTHF vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF (FTHF) 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.

	FTHF	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.79	4.94	-2.15
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.22	8.71	-5.50
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.52	2.41	-0.89
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	6.16	24.37	-18.21
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.85	96.52	-79.67

FTHF vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FTHF Sharpe Ratio is 2.79, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 4.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FTHF 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

FTHF vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FTHF drawdown since its inception was -17.36%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FTHF and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	FTHF	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-17.36%	-0.36%	-17.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.31%	-0.12%	-16.19%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.80%	0.00%	-6.80%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.22%	-0.02%	-4.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.95%	0.03%	+5.92%

Volatility

FTHF vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF (FTHF) has a higher volatility of 17.38% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.09%. This indicates that FTHF'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

	FTHF	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.38%	0.09%	+17.29%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	28.89%	0.39%	+28.50%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	36.06%	0.58%	+35.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	26.89%	0.87%	+26.02%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	26.89%	0.87%	+26.02%

FTHF vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

FTHF has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

FTHF vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

FTHF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.03%, which matches BAMU's 3.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	3.05%	3.20%	3.97%	0.84%
FTHF First Trust Emerging Markets Human Flourishing ETF	3.03%	4.40%	3.34%	0.51%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FTHF and BAMU in my portfolio?

FTHF 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, FTHF or BAMU?

FTHF has higher volatility (17.38%) compared to BAMU (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FTHF dropped -17.36% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, FTHF or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, FTHF leads with 99.98% vs 2.87% for BAMU. On fees, FTHF is cheaper at 0.75% 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, FTHF or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, FTHF has performed better with a 99.98% return vs 2.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FTHF or BAMU?

FTHF is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.

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

BAMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.05%, compared with 3.03% for FTHF.

What is the main difference between FTHF and BAMU?

FTHF is categorized as Emerging Markets Diversified, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for FTHF and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.94 vs 2.79), 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.