PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
IMRA vs. OMAH
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

IMRA vs. OMAH - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bitwise MARA Option Income Strategy ETF (IMRA) and VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IMRA achieves a 30.26% return, which is significantly higher than OMAH's 4.56% return.


IMRA

1D
-0.83%
1M
9.36%
YTD
30.26%
6M
0.68%
1Y
-32.66%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

OMAH

1D
-0.70%
1M
0.44%
YTD
4.56%
6M
4.00%
1Y
11.44%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IMRA vs. OMAH - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between IMRA and OMAH is 0.18, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.19

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 4, 2025

0.27

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. OMAH — Risk / Return Rank

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

IMRA
IMRA Risk / Return Rank: 55
Overall Rank
IMRA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 44
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IMRA Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
Sortino Ratio Rank
IMRA Omega Ratio Rank: 55
Omega Ratio Rank
IMRA Calmar Ratio Rank: 44
Calmar Ratio Rank
IMRA Martin Ratio Rank: 55
Martin Ratio Rank

OMAH
OMAH Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
OMAH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3939
Sharpe Ratio Rank
OMAH Sortino Ratio Rank: 3838
Sortino Ratio Rank
OMAH Omega Ratio Rank: 3737
Omega Ratio Rank
OMAH Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
OMAH Martin Ratio Rank: 5454
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

IMRA vs. OMAH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bitwise MARA Option Income Strategy ETF (IMRA) and VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH). 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.


IMRAOMAHDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.98

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.53

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

0.94

1.25

-0.31

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

-0.53

3.82

-4.36

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

-0.86

9.48

-10.34

IMRA vs. OMAH - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMRA Sharpe Ratio is -0.55, which is lower than the OMAH Sharpe Ratio of 1.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMRA and OMAH, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


IMRAOMAHDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.55

1.43

-1.98

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.19

0.70

-0.89

Drawdowns

IMRA vs. OMAH - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMRA drawdown since its inception was -61.55%, which is greater than OMAH's maximum drawdown of -11.83%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMRA and OMAH.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IMRAOMAHDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-61.55%

-11.83%

-49.72%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-61.55%

-3.00%

-58.55%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-40.71%

-2.65%

-38.06%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-28.21%

-1.26%

-26.95%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

37.93%

1.21%

+36.72%

Volatility

IMRA vs. OMAH - Volatility Comparison

Bitwise MARA Option Income Strategy ETF (IMRA) has a higher volatility of 9.53% compared to VistaShares Target 15™ Berkshire Select Income ETF (OMAH) at 1.93%. This indicates that IMRA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than OMAH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IMRAOMAHDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.53%

1.93%

+7.60%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

43.61%

5.49%

+38.12%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

59.89%

8.05%

+51.84%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

61.39%

13.21%

+48.18%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

61.39%

13.21%

+48.18%

IMRA vs. OMAH - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMRA has a 0.98% expense ratio, which is higher than OMAH's 0.95% expense ratio.


Dividends

IMRA vs. OMAH - Dividend Comparison

IMRA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 108.66%, more than OMAH's 15.44% yield.


Frequently Asked Questions


IMRA and OMAH have a correlation of 0.18, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IMRA has higher volatility (9.53%) compared to OMAH (1.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMRA dropped -61.55% vs OMAH's -11.83%.

On 1-year performance, OMAH leads with 11.44% vs -32.66% for IMRA. On fees, OMAH is cheaper at 0.95% per year. On volatility, OMAH has been the lower-risk option at 1.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, OMAH has performed better with a 11.44% return vs -32.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

OMAH is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 0.98% for IMRA.

IMRA has the higher dividend yield at 108.66%, compared with 15.44% for OMAH.

They also come from different issuers: Bitwise and VistaShares. Their fees differ too: 0.98% for IMRA and 0.95% for OMAH.

OMAH currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.43 vs -0.55), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for IMRA and OMAH

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