ICLO vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

ICLO (Invesco Aaa CLO Floating Rate Note ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ICLO is a CLO fund actively managed by Invesco, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, ICLO returned 5.71% vs 2.93% for BAMU. At a correlation of -0.02, they often move in opposite directions. ICLO charges 0.26%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

ICLO vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco Aaa CLO Floating Rate Note ETF (ICLO) 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, ICLO achieves a 2.11% return, which is significantly higher than BAMU's 1.06% return.

ICLO

• 1D: 0.04%
• 1M: 0.49%
• YTD: 2.11%
• 6M: 2.50%
• 1Y: 5.71%
• 3Y*: 6.75%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BAMU

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.20%
• YTD: 1.06%
• 6M: 1.25%
• 1Y: 2.93%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

ICLO vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
ICLO Invesco Aaa CLO Floating Rate Note ETF	2.11%	5.27%	7.05%	2.44%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.06%	3.21%	4.14%	1.20%

Correlation

The correlation between ICLO and BAMU is -0.07, 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	-0.07
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 28, 2023	-0.02

ICLO vs. BAMU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	ICLO	BAMU
Financial Services	6.6%	98.8%
Consumer Cyclical	3.3%	-
Basic Materials	2.2%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	-
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

ICLO vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

ICLO

ICLO Risk / Return Rank: 97
ICLO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 96
ICLO Sortino Ratio Rank: 98
ICLO Omega Ratio Rank: 98
ICLO Calmar Ratio Rank: 98
ICLO Martin Ratio Rank: 98

BAMU

BAMU Risk / Return Rank: 98
BAMU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
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.

ICLO vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco Aaa CLO Floating Rate Note ETF (ICLO) 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.

	ICLO	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.20	4.98	-0.78
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	7.14	8.77	-1.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.02	2.41	-0.39
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	16.31	24.89	-8.58
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	70.34	97.89	-27.55
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ICLO vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ICLO Sharpe Ratio is 4.20, which is comparable to the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 4.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ICLO 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	ICLO	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	4.20	4.98	-0.78
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	2.83	4.14	-1.31

Drawdowns

ICLO vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ICLO drawdown since its inception was -3.47%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ICLO and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	ICLO	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-3.47%	-0.36%	-3.11%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.35%	-0.12%	-0.23%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-3.47%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.06%	-0.02%	-0.04%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.08%	0.03%	+0.05%

Volatility

ICLO vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

Invesco Aaa CLO Floating Rate Note ETF (ICLO) has a higher volatility of 0.31% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.07%. This indicates that ICLO'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

	ICLO	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.31%	0.07%	+0.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.78%	0.43%	+0.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.37%	0.59%	+0.78%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.42%	0.87%	+1.55%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.42%	0.87%	+1.55%

ICLO vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

ICLO has a 0.26% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

ICLO vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

ICLO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 5.12%, 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%
ICLO Invesco Aaa CLO Floating Rate Note ETF	5.12%	5.49%	6.51%	7.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ICLO and BAMU in my portfolio?

ICLO and BAMU have a correlation of -0.07, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ICLO or BAMU?

ICLO has higher volatility (0.31%) compared to BAMU (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ICLO dropped -3.47% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, ICLO or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, ICLO leads with 5.71% vs 2.93% for BAMU. On fees, ICLO is cheaper at 0.26% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, ICLO or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, ICLO has performed better with a 5.71% return vs 2.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ICLO or BAMU?

ICLO is cheaper with a 0.26% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.

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

ICLO has the higher dividend yield at 5.12%, compared with 3.06% for BAMU.

What is the main difference between ICLO and BAMU?

ICLO is categorized as CLO, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.26% for ICLO and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.98 vs 4.20), 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.