HIMZ vs. BAMU
HIMZ (Defiance Daily Target 2X Long HIMS ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - HIMZ is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by Defiance, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, HIMZ returned -93.56% vs 2.93% for BAMU. At a correlation of -0.05, they often move in opposite directions. HIMZ charges 1.31%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.
Performance
HIMZ vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, HIMZ achieves a -58.85% return, which is significantly lower than BAMU's 1.06% return.
HIMZ
- 1D
- 0.06%
- 1M
- -7.54%
- YTD
- -58.85%
- 6M
- -69.67%
- 1Y
- -93.56%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BAMU
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.20%
- YTD
- 1.06%
- 6M
- 1.25%
- 1Y
- 2.93%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
HIMZ vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
HIMZ Defiance Daily Target 2X Long HIMS ETF | -58.85% | -65.21% |
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF | 1.06% | 2.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between HIMZ and BAMU is -0.12, 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 | -0.12 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 14, 2025 | -0.05 |
HIMZ vs. BAMU - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
HIMZ
BAMU
Consumer Defensive
-
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Consumer Defensive
HIMZ
BAMU
-
Basic Materials
HIMZ
-
BAMU
-
Communication Services
HIMZ
-
BAMU
-
Consumer Cyclical
HIMZ
-
BAMU
-
Energy
HIMZ
-
BAMU
-
Financial Services
HIMZ
-
BAMU
Healthcare
HIMZ
-
BAMU
-
Industrials
HIMZ
-
BAMU
-
Real Estate
HIMZ
-
BAMU
-
Technology
HIMZ
-
BAMU
-
Utilities
HIMZ
-
BAMU
-
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
HIMZ vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank
HIMZ
BAMU
HIMZ vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Defiance Daily Target 2X Long HIMS ETF (HIMZ) 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.
| HIMZ | BAMU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -5.47 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -9.36 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.93 | 2.41 | -1.48 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.96 | 24.89 | -25.85 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -1.18 | 97.89 | -99.07 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| HIMZ | BAMU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.49 | 4.98 | -5.47 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.40 | 4.14 | -4.54 |
Drawdowns
HIMZ vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum HIMZ drawdown since its inception was -98.18%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for HIMZ and BAMU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| HIMZ | BAMU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -98.18% | -0.36% | -97.82% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -98.04% | -0.12% | -97.92% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -95.53% | 0.00% | -95.53% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -68.90% | -0.02% | -68.88% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 79.15% | 0.03% | +79.12% |
Volatility
HIMZ vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison
Defiance Daily Target 2X Long HIMS ETF (HIMZ) has a higher volatility of 53.92% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.07%. This indicates that HIMZ'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
| HIMZ | BAMU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 53.92% | 0.07% | +53.85% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 131.06% | 0.43% | +130.63% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 191.74% | 0.59% | +191.15% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 200.34% | 0.87% | +199.47% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 200.34% | 0.87% | +199.47% |
HIMZ vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison
HIMZ has a 1.31% expense ratio, which is higher than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.
Dividends
HIMZ vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison
HIMZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.94%, more than BAMU's 3.06% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF | 3.06% | 3.20% | 3.97% | 0.84% |
HIMZ Defiance Daily Target 2X Long HIMS ETF | 5.94% | 2.44% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
HIMZ and BAMU have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
HIMZ has higher volatility (53.92%) compared to BAMU (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, HIMZ dropped -98.18% vs BAMU's -0.36%.
On 1-year performance, BAMU leads with 2.93% vs -93.56% for HIMZ. On fees, BAMU is cheaper at 1.09% per year. On volatility, BAMU has been the lower-risk option at 0.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, BAMU has performed better with a 2.93% return vs -93.56%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BAMU is cheaper with a 1.09% expense ratio, compared with 1.31% for HIMZ.
HIMZ has the higher dividend yield at 5.94%, compared with 3.06% for BAMU.
HIMZ is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Defiance and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 1.31% for HIMZ and 1.09% for BAMU.
BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.98 vs -0.49), 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 HIMZ 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