MRAL vs. BAMU
MRAL (GraniteShares 2x Long MARA Daily ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MRAL is a Leveraged Equities fund tracking the MARA Holdings Inc. (MARA), while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. MRAL is passively managed, while BAMU is actively managed. Over the past year, MRAL returned -60.79% vs 2.93% for BAMU. At a correlation of -0.05, they often move in opposite directions. MRAL charges 1.50%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.
Performance
MRAL vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MRAL achieves a 65.74% return, which is significantly higher than BAMU's 1.06% return.
MRAL
- 1D
- -4.00%
- 1M
- 33.63%
- YTD
- 65.74%
- 6M
- -16.49%
- 1Y
- -60.79%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BAMU
- 1D
- 0.02%
- 1M
- 0.20%
- YTD
- 1.06%
- 6M
- 1.25%
- 1Y
- 2.93%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MRAL vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
MRAL GraniteShares 2x Long MARA Daily ETF | 65.74% | -83.75% |
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF | 1.06% | 2.62% |
Correlation
The correlation between MRAL and BAMU is -0.12, 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 | -0.12 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 10, 2025 | -0.05 |
MRAL vs. BAMU - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
MRAL
BAMU
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
MRAL
BAMU
Basic Materials
MRAL
-
BAMU
-
Communication Services
MRAL
-
BAMU
-
Consumer Cyclical
MRAL
-
BAMU
-
Consumer Defensive
MRAL
-
BAMU
-
Energy
MRAL
-
BAMU
-
Healthcare
MRAL
-
BAMU
-
Industrials
MRAL
-
BAMU
-
Real Estate
MRAL
-
BAMU
-
Technology
MRAL
-
BAMU
-
Utilities
MRAL
-
BAMU
-
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
MRAL vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank
MRAL
BAMU
MRAL vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long MARA Daily ETF (MRAL) 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.
| MRAL | BAMU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.40 | 4.98 | -5.38 |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 0.22 | 8.77 | -8.55 |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.03 | 2.41 | -1.38 |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | -0.65 | 24.89 | -25.54 |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | -0.92 | 97.89 | -98.81 |
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
| MRAL | BAMU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | -0.40 | 4.98 | -5.38 |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.40 | 4.14 | -4.54 |
Drawdowns
MRAL vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MRAL drawdown since its inception was -93.46%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MRAL and BAMU.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MRAL | BAMU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -93.46% | -0.36% | -93.10% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -93.46% | -0.12% | -93.34% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -78.17% | 0.00% | -78.17% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -56.03% | -0.02% | -56.01% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 66.02% | 0.03% | +65.99% |
Volatility
MRAL vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison
GraniteShares 2x Long MARA Daily ETF (MRAL) has a higher volatility of 33.29% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.07%. This indicates that MRAL'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
| MRAL | BAMU | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 33.29% | 0.07% | +33.22% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 115.01% | 0.43% | +114.58% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 153.49% | 0.59% | +152.90% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 164.22% | 0.87% | +163.35% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 164.22% | 0.87% | +163.35% |
MRAL vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison
MRAL has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.
Dividends
MRAL vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison
MRAL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BAMU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.06%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF | 3.06% | 3.20% | 3.97% | 0.84% |
MRAL GraniteShares 2x Long MARA Daily ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MRAL and BAMU have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MRAL has higher volatility (33.29%) compared to BAMU (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MRAL dropped -93.46% vs BAMU's -0.36%.
On 1-year performance, BAMU leads with 2.93% vs -60.79% for MRAL. On fees, BAMU is cheaper at 1.09% 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 2.93% return vs -60.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
BAMU is cheaper with a 1.09% expense ratio, compared with 1.50% for MRAL.
BAMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.06%, compared with 0.00% for MRAL.
MRAL is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: GraniteShares and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 1.50% for MRAL and 1.09% for BAMU.
BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.98 vs -0.40), 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 MRAL 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