JULT vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

JULT (AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - JULT is a Options Trading fund actively managed by Allianz, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, JULT returned 18.84% vs 2.91% for BAMU. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. JULT charges 0.74%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

JULT vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF (JULT) 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, JULT achieves a 6.27% return, which is significantly higher than BAMU's 1.18% return.

JULT

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 0.78%
• YTD: 6.27%
• 6M: 6.21%
• 1Y: 18.84%
• 3Y*: 15.61%
• 5Y*: 11.40%
• 10Y*: —

BAMU

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.16%
• YTD: 1.18%
• 6M: 1.23%
• 1Y: 2.91%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

JULT vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
JULT AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF	6.27%	13.73%	17.43%	9.09%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.18%	3.21%	4.14%	1.20%

Correlation

The correlation between JULT and BAMU is -0.13, 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	-0.13
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2023	-0.01

The correlation between JULT and BAMU shifts across timeframes, from -0.13 (1 year) to -0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

JULT vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

JULT

JULT Risk / Return Rank: 86
JULT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
JULT Sortino Ratio Rank: 90
JULT Omega Ratio Rank: 91
JULT Calmar Ratio Rank: 74
JULT Martin Ratio Rank: 90

BAMU

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

JULT vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF (JULT) 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.

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.

	JULT	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.71	5.01	-2.29
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.99	8.84	-4.85
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.56	2.43	-0.86
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.62	24.72	-21.10
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	19.62	97.90	-78.28

JULT vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JULT Sharpe Ratio is 2.71, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 5.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JULT 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.

Drawdowns

JULT vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JULT drawdown since its inception was -13.57%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULT and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	JULT	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-13.57%	-0.36%	-13.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-5.22%	-0.12%	-5.10%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.57%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-13.57%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.76%	-0.02%	-1.74%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.96%	0.03%	+0.93%

Volatility

JULT vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF (JULT) has a higher volatility of 0.96% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.09%. This indicates that JULT'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

	JULT	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.96%	0.09%	+0.87%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	5.23%	0.40%	+4.83%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.99%	0.58%	+6.41%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.02%	0.87%	+10.15%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	10.45%	0.87%	+9.58%

JULT vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

JULT has a 0.74% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

JULT vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

JULT has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BAMU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.05%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	3.05%	3.20%	3.97%	0.84%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
JULT AllianzIM U.S. Large Cap Buffer10 Jul ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	3.86%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both JULT and BAMU in my portfolio?

JULT and BAMU have a correlation of -0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, JULT or BAMU?

JULT has higher volatility (0.96%) compared to BAMU (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JULT dropped -13.57% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, JULT or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, JULT leads with 18.84% vs 2.91% for BAMU. On fees, JULT is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, BAMU has been the lower-risk option at 0.09%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, JULT or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, JULT has performed better with a 18.84% return vs 2.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, JULT or BAMU?

JULT is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.

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

BAMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.05%, compared with 0.00% for JULT.

What is the main difference between JULT and BAMU?

JULT is categorized as Options Trading, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Allianz and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.74% for JULT and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.01 vs 2.71), 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.