MAMB vs. BNDS

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

MAMB (Monarch Ambassador Income ETF) and BNDS (Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF) are both Intermediate Core-Plus Bond funds. MAMB is passively managed, while BNDS is actively managed. Over the past year, MAMB returned 7.54% vs 11.40% for BNDS. At a 0.44 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MAMB charges 1.49%/yr vs 0.81%/yr for BNDS.

Performance

MAMB vs. BNDS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Monarch Ambassador Income ETF (MAMB) and Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF (BNDS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MAMB achieves a 1.59% return, which is significantly lower than BNDS's 4.60% return.

MAMB

• 1D: -0.11%
• 1M: 0.21%
• YTD: 1.59%
• 6M: 1.04%
• 1Y: 7.54%
• 3Y*: 5.24%
• 5Y*: 0.66%
• 10Y*: —

BNDS

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 0.51%
• YTD: 4.60%
• 6M: 4.85%
• 1Y: 11.40%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MAMB vs. BNDS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MAMB Monarch Ambassador Income ETF	1.59%	11.50%
BNDS Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF	4.60%	8.45%

Correlation

The correlation between MAMB and BNDS is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.44
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 15, 2025	0.44

Return for Risk

MAMB vs. BNDS — Risk / Return Rank

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

MAMB

MAMB Risk / Return Rank: 40
MAMB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 40
MAMB Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
MAMB Omega Ratio Rank: 38
MAMB Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
MAMB Martin Ratio Rank: 39

BNDS

BNDS Risk / Return Rank: 87
BNDS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
BNDS Sortino Ratio Rank: 95
BNDS Omega Ratio Rank: 95
BNDS Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
BNDS Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

MAMB vs. BNDS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Monarch Ambassador Income ETF (MAMB) and Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF (BNDS). 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.

	MAMB	BNDS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.32	3.28	-1.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.86	4.81	-2.95
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.24	1.69	-0.45
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.13	3.32	-1.19
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.67	15.30	-9.64

MAMB vs. BNDS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MAMB Sharpe Ratio is 1.32, which is lower than the BNDS Sharpe Ratio of 3.28. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MAMB and BNDS, 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

MAMB vs. BNDS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MAMB drawdown since its inception was -19.33%, which is greater than BNDS's maximum drawdown of -6.96%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MAMB and BNDS.

Drawdown Indicators

	MAMB	BNDS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.33%	-6.96%	-12.37%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-3.55%	-3.45%	-0.10%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-7.38%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-19.33%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.06%	-0.27%	-1.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.44%	-0.79%	-6.65%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.33%	0.75%	+0.58%

Volatility

MAMB vs. BNDS - Volatility Comparison

Monarch Ambassador Income ETF (MAMB) has a higher volatility of 1.71% compared to Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF (BNDS) at 0.76%. This indicates that MAMB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BNDS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MAMB	BNDS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	1.71%	0.76%	+0.95%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	4.42%	2.72%	+1.70%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	5.73%	3.50%	+2.23%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	7.02%	5.20%	+1.82%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	6.91%	5.20%	+1.71%

MAMB vs. BNDS - Expense Ratio Comparison

MAMB has a 1.49% expense ratio, which is higher than BNDS's 0.81% expense ratio.

Dividends

MAMB vs. BNDS - Dividend Comparison

MAMB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.45%, less than BNDS's 7.94% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BNDS Infrastructure Capital Bond Income ETF	7.94%	7.98%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
MAMB Monarch Ambassador Income ETF	2.45%	2.47%	2.11%	1.73%	0.92%	0.56%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MAMB and BNDS in my portfolio?

MAMB and BNDS have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MAMB or BNDS?

MAMB has higher volatility (1.71%) compared to BNDS (0.76%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MAMB dropped -19.33% vs BNDS's -6.96%.

Which ETF is better, MAMB or BNDS?

On 1-year performance, BNDS leads with 11.40% vs 7.54% for MAMB. On fees, BNDS is cheaper at 0.81% per year. On volatility, BNDS has been the lower-risk option at 0.76%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MAMB or BNDS?

Over the 1-year period, BNDS has performed better with a 11.40% return vs 7.54%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MAMB or BNDS?

BNDS is cheaper with a 0.81% expense ratio, compared with 1.49% for MAMB.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MAMB or BNDS?

BNDS has the higher dividend yield at 7.94%, compared with 2.45% for MAMB.

What is the main difference between MAMB and BNDS?

They also come from different issuers: Monarch and InfraCap. Their fees differ too: 1.49% for MAMB and 0.81% for BNDS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BNDS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.28 vs 1.32), 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.