PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
RDTL vs. BAMU
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

RDTL vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in GraniteShares 2x Long RDDT Daily ETF (RDTL) and Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RDTL achieves a -50.79% return, which is significantly lower than BAMU's 1.08% return.


RDTL

1D
17.12%
1M
9.34%
YTD
-50.79%
6M
-48.63%
1Y
35.05%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*

BAMU

1D
0.02%
1M
0.22%
YTD
1.08%
6M
1.31%
1Y
2.95%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RDTL vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025
RDTL
GraniteShares 2x Long RDDT Daily ETF
-50.79%98.12%
BAMU
Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF
1.08%2.41%

Correlation

The correlation between RDTL and BAMU is -0.10, 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

-0.10

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 26, 2025

-0.04

RDTL vs. BAMU - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RDTL
BAMU

Communication Services

66.7%

-

Basic Materials

-

-

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Energy

-

-

Financial Services

-

98.8%

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Technology

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Communication Services

RDTL
66.7%
BAMU

-

Basic Materials

RDTL

-

BAMU

-

Consumer Cyclical

RDTL

-

BAMU

-

Consumer Defensive

RDTL

-

BAMU

-

Energy

RDTL

-

BAMU

-

Financial Services

RDTL

-

BAMU
98.8%

Healthcare

RDTL

-

BAMU

-

Industrials

RDTL

-

BAMU

-

Real Estate

RDTL

-

BAMU

-

Technology

RDTL

-

BAMU

-

Utilities

RDTL

-

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

RDTL vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

RDTL
RDTL Risk / Return Rank: 1818
Overall Rank
RDTL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1313
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RDTL Sortino Ratio Rank: 2525
Sortino Ratio Rank
RDTL Omega Ratio Rank: 2424
Omega Ratio Rank
RDTL Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
RDTL Martin Ratio Rank: 1212
Martin Ratio Rank

BAMU
BAMU Risk / Return Rank: 9898
Overall Rank
BAMU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9898
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BAMU Sortino Ratio Rank: 9898
Sortino Ratio Rank
BAMU Omega Ratio Rank: 9898
Omega Ratio Rank
BAMU Calmar Ratio Rank: 9999
Calmar Ratio Rank
BAMU Martin Ratio Rank: 9999
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

RDTL vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for GraniteShares 2x Long RDDT Daily ETF (RDTL) 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.


RDTLBAMUDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-4.74

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-7.51

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.16

2.42

-1.26

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.41

25.06

-24.65

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.66

98.57

-97.91

RDTL vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RDTL Sharpe Ratio is 0.27, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 5.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RDTL 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


RDTLBAMUDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.27

5.01

-4.74

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.01

4.15

-4.16

Drawdowns

RDTL vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RDTL drawdown since its inception was -85.21%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RDTL and BAMU.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RDTLBAMUDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-85.21%

-0.36%

-84.85%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-85.21%

-0.12%

-85.09%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-70.05%

0.00%

-70.05%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-43.89%

-0.02%

-43.87%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

53.12%

0.03%

+53.09%

Volatility

RDTL vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

GraniteShares 2x Long RDDT Daily ETF (RDTL) has a higher volatility of 39.22% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.07%. This indicates that RDTL'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


RDTLBAMUDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

39.22%

0.07%

+39.15%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

90.31%

0.43%

+89.88%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

130.66%

0.59%

+130.07%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

142.11%

0.87%

+141.24%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

142.11%

0.87%

+141.24%

RDTL vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

RDTL has a 1.50% expense ratio, which is higher than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.


Dividends

RDTL vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

RDTL has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BAMU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.06%.


PositionTTM202520242023
BAMU
Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF
3.06%3.20%3.97%0.84%
RDTL
GraniteShares 2x Long RDDT Daily ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


RDTL and BAMU have a correlation of -0.10, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

RDTL has higher volatility (39.22%) compared to BAMU (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RDTL dropped -85.21% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

On 1-year performance, RDTL leads with 35.05% vs 2.95% for BAMU. 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, RDTL has performed better with a 35.05% return vs 2.95%. 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 RDTL.

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

RDTL 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 RDTL and 1.09% for BAMU.

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.01 vs 0.27), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for RDTL 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