QQQT vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

QQQT (Defiance Nasdaq 100 Income Target ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - QQQT is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Defiance, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, QQQT returned 28.68% vs 2.87% for BAMU. At a correlation of -0.02, they often move in opposite directions. QQQT charges 1.05%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

QQQT vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Defiance Nasdaq 100 Income Target ETF (QQQT) 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, QQQT achieves a 15.08% return, which is significantly higher than BAMU's 1.18% return.

QQQT

• 1D: -3.34%
• 1M: -0.40%
• YTD: 15.08%
• 6M: 14.12%
• 1Y: 28.68%
• 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)

QQQT vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
QQQT Defiance Nasdaq 100 Income Target ETF	15.08%	14.04%	4.20%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.18%	3.21%	2.25%

Correlation

The correlation between QQQT 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 Jun 21, 2024	-0.02

The correlation between QQQT and BAMU shifts across timeframes, from -0.17 (1 year) to -0.02 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

QQQT vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

QQQT

QQQT Risk / Return Rank: 51
QQQT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
QQQT Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
QQQT Omega Ratio Rank: 55
QQQT Calmar Ratio Rank: 48
QQQT Martin Ratio Rank: 48

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.

QQQT vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Defiance Nasdaq 100 Income Target ETF (QQQT) 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.

	QQQT	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.74	4.94	-3.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.33	8.71	-6.38
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	2.41	-1.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.26	24.37	-22.11
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.75	96.52	-88.77

QQQT vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QQQT Sharpe Ratio is 1.74, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 4.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QQQT 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

QQQT vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QQQT drawdown since its inception was -22.50%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QQQT and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	QQQT	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.50%	-0.36%	-22.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.73%	-0.12%	-12.61%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.94%	0.00%	-3.94%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.98%	-0.02%	-3.96%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.71%	0.03%	+3.68%

Volatility

QQQT vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

Defiance Nasdaq 100 Income Target ETF (QQQT) has a higher volatility of 8.62% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.09%. This indicates that QQQT'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

	QQQT	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.62%	0.09%	+8.53%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.55%	0.39%	+13.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.56%	0.58%	+15.98%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.78%	0.87%	+19.91%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.78%	0.87%	+19.91%

QQQT vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

QQQT has a 1.05% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

QQQT vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

QQQT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 19.89%, 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%
QQQT Defiance Nasdaq 100 Income Target ETF	19.89%	21.27%	10.35%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QQQT and BAMU in my portfolio?

QQQT 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, QQQT or BAMU?

QQQT has higher volatility (8.62%) compared to BAMU (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QQQT dropped -22.50% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, QQQT or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, QQQT leads with 28.68% vs 2.87% for BAMU. On fees, QQQT is cheaper at 1.05% 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, QQQT or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, QQQT has performed better with a 28.68% return vs 2.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QQQT or BAMU?

QQQT is cheaper with a 1.05% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.

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

QQQT has the higher dividend yield at 19.89%, compared with 3.05% for BAMU.

What is the main difference between QQQT and BAMU?

QQQT is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Defiance and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 1.05% for QQQT and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.94 vs 1.74), 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.