PALL vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

PALL (Aberdeen Standard Physical Palladium Shares ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PALL is a Precious Metals fund tracking the Palladium London PM Fix ($/ozt), while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. PALL is passively managed, while BAMU is actively managed. Over the past year, PALL returned 28.17% vs 2.93% for BAMU. At a correlation of -0.08, they often move in opposite directions. PALL charges 0.60%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

PALL vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Aberdeen Standard Physical Palladium Shares ETF (PALL) 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, PALL achieves a -18.39% return, which is significantly lower than BAMU's 1.06% return.

PALL

• 1D: -4.89%
• 1M: -11.74%
• YTD: -18.39%
• 6M: -11.90%
• 1Y: 28.17%
• 3Y*: -3.26%
• 5Y*: -14.89%
• 10Y*: 8.36%

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)

PALL vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
PALL Aberdeen Standard Physical Palladium Shares ETF	-18.39%	74.07%	-17.38%	-10.19%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.06%	3.21%	4.14%	1.20%

Correlation

The correlation between PALL and BAMU is -0.13, 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	-0.13
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 28, 2023	-0.08

Return for Risk

PALL vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

PALL

PALL Risk / Return Rank: 19
PALL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
PALL Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
PALL Omega Ratio Rank: 21
PALL Calmar Ratio Rank: 19
PALL Martin Ratio Rank: 17

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.

PALL vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Aberdeen Standard Physical Palladium Shares ETF (PALL) 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.

	PALL	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	0.56	4.98	-4.42
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	1.04	8.77	-7.73
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.14	2.41	-1.27
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.78	24.89	-24.11
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	1.74	97.89	-96.15
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

PALL vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PALL Sharpe Ratio is 0.56, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 4.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PALL 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

	PALL	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.56	4.98	-4.42
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	-0.35	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.22	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.18	4.14	-3.97

Drawdowns

PALL vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PALL drawdown since its inception was -73.63%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PALL and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	PALL	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-73.63%	-0.36%	-73.27%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-36.18%	-0.12%	-36.06%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-40.47%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-73.63%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-73.63%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-59.78%	0.00%	-59.78%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-26.81%	-0.02%	-26.79%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	16.25%	0.03%	+16.22%

Volatility

PALL vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

Aberdeen Standard Physical Palladium Shares ETF (PALL) has a higher volatility of 10.54% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.07%. This indicates that PALL'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

	PALL	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.54%	0.07%	+10.47%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	41.87%	0.43%	+41.44%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	50.24%	0.59%	+49.65%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	42.46%	0.87%	+41.59%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	37.91%	0.87%	+37.04%

PALL vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

PALL has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

PALL vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

PALL 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%
PALL Aberdeen Standard Physical Palladium Shares ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both PALL and BAMU in my portfolio?

PALL and BAMU have a correlation of -0.13, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PALL or BAMU?

PALL has higher volatility (10.54%) compared to BAMU (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PALL dropped -73.63% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, PALL or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, PALL leads with 28.17% vs 2.93% for BAMU. On fees, PALL is cheaper at 0.60% 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, PALL or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, PALL has performed better with a 28.17% return vs 2.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PALL or BAMU?

PALL is cheaper with a 0.60% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.

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

BAMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.06%, compared with 0.00% for PALL.

What is the main difference between PALL and BAMU?

PALL is categorized as Precious Metals, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Aberdeen and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for PALL and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.98 vs 0.56), 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.