MSII vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

MSII (REX MSTR Growth & Income ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - MSII is a Leveraged Equities fund actively managed by REX, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, MSII returned -70.57% vs 2.87% for BAMU. At a correlation of -0.08, they often move in opposite directions. MSII charges 0.99%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

MSII vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in REX MSTR Growth & Income ETF (MSII) 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, MSII achieves a -28.10% return, which is significantly lower than BAMU's 1.18% return.

MSII

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -30.37%
• YTD: -28.10%
• 6M: -30.19%
• 1Y: -70.57%
• 3Y*: —
• 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)

MSII vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
MSII REX MSTR Growth & Income ETF	-28.10%	-61.03%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.18%	1.85%

Correlation

The correlation between MSII and BAMU is -0.08, 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	-0.08
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 4, 2025	-0.08

Return for Risk

MSII vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

MSII

MSII Risk / Return Rank: 1
MSII Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1
MSII Sortino Ratio Rank: 1
MSII Omega Ratio Rank: 1
MSII Calmar Ratio Rank: 1
MSII Martin Ratio Rank: 3

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.

MSII vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for REX MSTR Growth & Income ETF (MSII) 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.

	MSII	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.98	4.94	-5.92
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.76	8.71	-10.48
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.79	2.41	-1.61
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.90	24.37	-25.27
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.28	96.52	-97.80

MSII vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MSII Sharpe Ratio is -0.98, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 4.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MSII 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

MSII vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MSII drawdown since its inception was -78.73%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MSII and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	MSII	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-78.73%	-0.36%	-78.37%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-78.73%	-0.12%	-78.61%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-76.65%	0.00%	-76.65%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-47.49%	-0.02%	-47.47%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	55.34%	0.03%	+55.31%

Volatility

MSII vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

REX MSTR Growth & Income ETF (MSII) has a higher volatility of 21.17% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.09%. This indicates that MSII'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

	MSII	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	21.17%	0.09%	+21.08%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	56.72%	0.39%	+56.33%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	71.96%	0.58%	+71.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	70.62%	0.87%	+69.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	70.62%	0.87%	+69.75%

MSII vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

MSII vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

MSII's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 97.58%, more than BAMU's 3.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	3.05%	3.20%	3.97%	0.84%
MSII REX MSTR Growth & Income ETF	97.58%	48.93%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MSII and BAMU in my portfolio?

MSII and BAMU have a correlation of -0.08, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, MSII or BAMU?

MSII has higher volatility (21.17%) compared to BAMU (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MSII dropped -78.73% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, MSII or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, BAMU leads with 2.87% vs -70.57% for MSII. On fees, MSII is cheaper at 0.99% 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, MSII or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, BAMU has performed better with a 2.87% return vs -70.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MSII or BAMU?

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

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

MSII has the higher dividend yield at 97.58%, compared with 3.05% for BAMU.

What is the main difference between MSII and BAMU?

MSII is categorized as Leveraged Equities, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: REX and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.99% for MSII and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.94 vs -0.98), 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.