IMRA vs. BAMU
IMRA (Bitwise MARA Option Income Strategy ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IMRA is a Derivative Income fund actively managed by Bitwise, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, IMRA returned -33.71% vs 2.95% for BAMU. At a correlation of -0.08, they often move in opposite directions. IMRA charges 0.98%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.
Performance
IMRA vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, IMRA achieves a 30.23% return, which is significantly higher than BAMU's 1.08% return.
IMRA
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 7.79%
- YTD
- 30.23%
- 6M
- -0.17%
- 1Y
- -33.71%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BAMU
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.22%
- YTD
- 1.08%
- 6M
- 1.31%
- 1Y
- 2.95%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
IMRA vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
IMRA Bitwise MARA Option Income Strategy ETF | 30.23% | -33.37% |
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF | 1.08% | 2.31% |
Correlation
The correlation between IMRA and BAMU is -0.11, 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 | -0.11 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2025 | -0.08 |
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
IMRA vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank
IMRA
BAMU
IMRA vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bitwise MARA Option Income Strategy ETF (IMRA) 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.
| IMRA | BAMU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -5.58 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -9.37 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 0.93 | 2.42 | -1.49 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.55 | 25.06 | -25.61 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.89 | 98.57 | -99.46 |
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
| IMRA | BAMU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.57 | 5.01 | -5.58 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.19 | 4.15 | -4.34 |
Drawdowns
IMRA vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum IMRA drawdown since its inception was -61.55%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMRA and BAMU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| IMRA | BAMU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -61.55% | -0.36% | -61.19% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -61.55% | -0.12% | -61.43% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -40.72% | 0.00% | -40.72% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -28.25% | -0.02% | -28.23% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 38.02% | 0.03% | +37.99% |
Volatility
IMRA vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison
Bitwise MARA Option Income Strategy ETF (IMRA) has a higher volatility of 9.48% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.07%. This indicates that IMRA'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
| IMRA | BAMU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 9.48% | 0.07% | +9.41% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 43.47% | 0.43% | +43.04% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 59.64% | 0.59% | +59.05% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 61.29% | 0.87% | +60.42% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 61.29% | 0.87% | +60.42% |
IMRA vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison
IMRA has a 0.98% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.
Dividends
IMRA vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison
IMRA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 108.68%, 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% |
IMRA Bitwise MARA Option Income Strategy ETF | 108.68% | 188.74% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
IMRA and BAMU have a correlation of -0.11, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
IMRA has higher volatility (9.48%) compared to BAMU (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMRA dropped -61.55% vs BAMU's -0.36%.
On 1-year performance, BAMU leads with 2.95% vs -33.71% for IMRA. On fees, IMRA is cheaper at 0.98% 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 2.95% return vs -33.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
IMRA is cheaper with a 0.98% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.
IMRA has the higher dividend yield at 108.68%, compared with 3.06% for BAMU.
IMRA is categorized as Derivative Income, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Bitwise and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.98% for IMRA and 1.09% for BAMU.
BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.01 vs -0.57), 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 IMRA 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