GDMA vs. BAMY

Last updated Jun 21, 2026

GDMA (Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF) and BAMY (Brookstone Yield ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GDMA is a Hedge Fund fund actively managed by Gadsden, while BAMY is a Diversified Portfolio fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, GDMA returned 34.59% vs 10.82% for BAMY. A 0.54 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GDMA charges 0.77%/yr vs 1.48%/yr for BAMY.

Performance

GDMA vs. BAMY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) and Brookstone Yield ETF (BAMY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GDMA achieves a 12.94% return, which is significantly higher than BAMY's 1.49% return.

GDMA

• 1D: 2.76%
• 1M: 5.60%
• YTD: 12.94%
• 6M: 14.08%
• 1Y: 34.59%
• 3Y*: 17.60%
• 5Y*: 9.29%
• 10Y*: —

BAMY

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: 0.58%
• YTD: 1.49%
• 6M: 1.69%
• 1Y: 10.82%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

GDMA vs. BAMY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
GDMA Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF	12.94%	25.29%	7.44%	3.52%
BAMY Brookstone Yield ETF	1.49%	12.93%	10.60%	5.20%

Correlation

The correlation between GDMA and BAMY is 0.53, 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	0.53
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 28, 2023	0.54

The correlation between GDMA and BAMY has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.53 to 0.54 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

GDMA vs. BAMY — Risk / Return Rank

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

GDMA

GDMA Risk / Return Rank: 74
GDMA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
GDMA Sortino Ratio Rank: 66
GDMA Omega Ratio Rank: 77
GDMA Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
GDMA Martin Ratio Rank: 67

BAMY

BAMY Risk / Return Rank: 82
BAMY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
BAMY Sortino Ratio Rank: 79
BAMY Omega Ratio Rank: 84
BAMY Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
BAMY Martin Ratio Rank: 89

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.

GDMA vs. BAMY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) and Brookstone Yield ETF (BAMY). 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.

	GDMA	BAMY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.24	2.30	-0.06
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.89	3.34	-0.45
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.43	1.48	-0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.41	4.24	+0.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.72	18.93	-7.21

GDMA vs. BAMY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GDMA Sharpe Ratio is 2.24, which is comparable to the BAMY Sharpe Ratio of 2.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GDMA and BAMY, 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

GDMA vs. BAMY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GDMA drawdown since its inception was -16.66%, which is greater than BAMY's maximum drawdown of -6.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GDMA and BAMY.

Drawdown Indicators

	GDMA	BAMY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.66%	-6.03%	-10.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.53%	-2.48%	-5.05%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.53%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-12.74%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-0.08%	+0.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.78%	-0.53%	-3.25%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.83%	0.55%	+2.28%

Volatility

GDMA vs. BAMY - Volatility Comparison

Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) has a higher volatility of 7.94% compared to Brookstone Yield ETF (BAMY) at 1.08%. This indicates that GDMA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BAMY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	GDMA	BAMY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.94%	1.08%	+6.86%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.27%	2.88%	+9.39%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.83%	4.58%	+10.25%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	10.09%	5.99%	+4.10%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.25%	5.99%	+5.26%

GDMA vs. BAMY - Expense Ratio Comparison

GDMA has a 0.77% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMY's 1.48% expense ratio.

Dividends

GDMA vs. BAMY - Dividend Comparison

GDMA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.47%, less than BAMY's 7.56% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019
BAMY Brookstone Yield ETF	7.56%	7.16%	8.20%	1.96%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
GDMA Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF	2.47%	2.79%	2.32%	4.14%	1.18%	2.10%	0.62%	3.17%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GDMA and BAMY in my portfolio?

GDMA and BAMY have a correlation of 0.53, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GDMA or BAMY?

GDMA has higher volatility (7.94%) compared to BAMY (1.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GDMA dropped -16.66% vs BAMY's -6.03%.

Which ETF is better, GDMA or BAMY?

On 1-year performance, GDMA leads with 34.59% vs 10.82% for BAMY. On fees, GDMA is cheaper at 0.77% per year. On volatility, BAMY has been the lower-risk option at 1.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GDMA or BAMY?

Over the 1-year period, GDMA has performed better with a 34.59% return vs 10.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GDMA or BAMY?

GDMA is cheaper with a 0.77% expense ratio, compared with 1.48% for BAMY.

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

BAMY has the higher dividend yield at 7.56%, compared with 2.47% for GDMA.

What is the main difference between GDMA and BAMY?

GDMA is categorized as Hedge Fund, while BAMY is Diversified Portfolio. They also come from different issuers: Gadsden and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.77% for GDMA and 1.48% for BAMY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.30 vs 2.24), 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.