MMSC vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

MMSC (First Trust Multi-Manager Small Cap Opportunities ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MMSC is a Small Cap Growth Equities fund actively managed by First Trust, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MMSC returned 42.61% vs 2.87% for BAMU. At a 0.01 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MMSC charges 0.95%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

MMSC vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in First Trust Multi-Manager Small Cap Opportunities ETF (MMSC) 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, MMSC achieves a 18.96% return, which is significantly higher than BAMU's 1.18% return.

MMSC

• 1D: -2.02%
• 1M: 2.63%
• YTD: 18.96%
• 6M: 15.83%
• 1Y: 42.61%
• 3Y*: 22.45%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BAMU

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.16%
• YTD: 1.18%
• 6M: 1.29%
• 1Y: 2.87%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MMSC vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
MMSC First Trust Multi-Manager Small Cap Opportunities ETF	18.96%	15.45%	22.19%	12.63%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.18%	3.21%	4.14%	1.20%

Correlation

The correlation between MMSC and BAMU is -0.09, 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	-0.09
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2023	0.01

Return for Risk

MMSC vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

MMSC

MMSC Risk / Return Rank: 60
MMSC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
MMSC Sortino Ratio Rank: 55
MMSC Omega Ratio Rank: 53
MMSC Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
MMSC Martin Ratio Rank: 68

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.

MMSC vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Multi-Manager Small Cap Opportunities ETF (MMSC) 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.

	MMSC	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.82	4.94	-3.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.44	8.71	-6.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.31	2.41	-1.10
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.04	24.37	-21.34
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	11.43	96.52	-85.09

MMSC vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MMSC Sharpe Ratio is 1.82, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 4.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MMSC 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

MMSC vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MMSC drawdown since its inception was -40.82%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MMSC and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	MMSC	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.82%	-0.36%	-40.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.10%	-0.12%	-13.98%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-29.76%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.02%	0.00%	-2.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-18.58%	-0.02%	-18.56%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.74%	0.03%	+3.71%

Volatility

MMSC vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Multi-Manager Small Cap Opportunities ETF (MMSC) has a higher volatility of 8.68% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.09%. This indicates that MMSC'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

	MMSC	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.68%	0.09%	+8.59%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.32%	0.39%	+17.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	23.54%	0.58%	+22.96%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	24.59%	0.87%	+23.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	24.59%	0.87%	+23.72%

MMSC vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

MMSC has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

MMSC vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

MMSC 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
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	3.05%	3.20%	3.97%	0.84%
MMSC First Trust Multi-Manager Small Cap Opportunities ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.41%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MMSC and BAMU in my portfolio?

MMSC and BAMU have a correlation of -0.09, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MMSC or BAMU?

MMSC has higher volatility (8.68%) compared to BAMU (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MMSC dropped -40.82% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, MMSC or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, MMSC leads with 42.61% vs 2.87% for BAMU. On fees, MMSC is cheaper at 0.95% 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, MMSC or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, MMSC has performed better with a 42.61% return vs 2.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MMSC or BAMU?

MMSC is cheaper with a 0.95% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.

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

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

What is the main difference between MMSC and BAMU?

MMSC is categorized as Small Cap Growth Equities, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for MMSC and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.94 vs 1.82), 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.