MSFO vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

MSFO (YieldMax MSFT Option Income Strategy ETF ) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MSFO is a Options Trading fund actively managed by YieldMax, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MSFO returned -4.82% vs 2.93% for BAMU. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. MSFO charges 0.99%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

MSFO vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in YieldMax MSFT Option Income Strategy ETF (MSFO) 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, MSFO achieves a -9.19% return, which is significantly lower than BAMU's 1.06% return.

MSFO

• 1D: -2.81%
• 1M: 2.02%
• YTD: -9.19%
• 6M: -7.90%
• 1Y: -4.82%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BAMU

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.20%
• YTD: 1.06%
• 6M: 1.25%
• 1Y: 2.93%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

MSFO vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
MSFO YieldMax MSFT Option Income Strategy ETF	-9.19%	15.69%	10.34%	21.21%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.06%	3.21%	4.14%	1.20%

Correlation

The correlation between MSFO and BAMU is -0.17, 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	-0.17
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 28, 2023	-0.01

The correlation between MSFO and BAMU shifts across timeframes, from -0.17 (1 year) to -0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

MSFO vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

MSFO

MSFO Risk / Return Rank: 7
MSFO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
MSFO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6
MSFO Omega Ratio Rank: 6
MSFO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
MSFO Martin Ratio Rank: 7

BAMU

BAMU Risk / Return Rank: 98
BAMU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
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.

MSFO vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for YieldMax MSFT Option Income Strategy ETF (MSFO) 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.

	MSFO	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.22	4.98	-5.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.16	8.77	-8.93
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.98	2.41	-1.43
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.17	24.89	-25.06
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.37	97.89	-98.26
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

MSFO vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MSFO Sharpe Ratio is -0.22, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 4.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MSFO 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	MSFO	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.22	4.98	-5.20
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.62	4.14	-3.53

Drawdowns

MSFO vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MSFO drawdown since its inception was -29.29%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MSFO and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	MSFO	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-29.29%	-0.36%	-28.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-29.29%	-0.12%	-29.17%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-16.79%	0.00%	-16.79%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.56%	-0.02%	-6.54%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.16%	0.03%	+13.13%

Volatility

MSFO vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

YieldMax MSFT Option Income Strategy ETF (MSFO) has a higher volatility of 8.28% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.07%. This indicates that MSFO'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

	MSFO	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.28%	0.07%	+8.21%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	19.23%	0.43%	+18.80%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	21.51%	0.59%	+20.92%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.78%	0.87%	+18.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.78%	0.87%	+18.91%

MSFO vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

MSFO has a 0.99% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

MSFO vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

MSFO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 38.67%, more than BAMU's 3.06% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	3.06%	3.20%	3.97%	0.84%
MSFO YieldMax MSFT Option Income Strategy ETF	38.67%	33.91%	35.15%	6.44%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MSFO and BAMU in my portfolio?

MSFO and BAMU have a correlation of -0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MSFO or BAMU?

MSFO has higher volatility (8.28%) compared to BAMU (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MSFO dropped -29.29% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, MSFO or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, BAMU leads with 2.93% vs -4.82% for MSFO. On fees, MSFO is cheaper at 0.99% 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.

Which ETF has performed better, MSFO or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, BAMU has performed better with a 2.93% return vs -4.82%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MSFO or BAMU?

MSFO is cheaper with a 0.99% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.

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

MSFO has the higher dividend yield at 38.67%, compared with 3.06% for BAMU.

What is the main difference between MSFO and BAMU?

MSFO is categorized as Options Trading, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: YieldMax and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for MSFO and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.98 vs -0.22), 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.