ROE vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

ROE (Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - ROE is a Large Cap Value Equities fund actively managed by Astoria, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, ROE returned 35.20% vs 2.87% for BAMU. At a 0.00 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. ROE charges 0.49%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

ROE vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF (ROE) 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, ROE achieves a 19.29% return, which is significantly higher than BAMU's 1.18% return.

ROE

• 1D: -2.17%
• 1M: 2.62%
• YTD: 19.29%
• 6M: 17.72%
• 1Y: 35.20%
• 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)

ROE vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
ROE Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF	19.29%	17.20%	18.34%	12.81%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.18%	3.21%	4.14%	1.20%

Correlation

The correlation between ROE and BAMU is -0.06, 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	-0.06
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2023	0.00

Return for Risk

ROE vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

ROE

ROE Risk / Return Rank: 81
ROE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 80
ROE Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
ROE Omega Ratio Rank: 77
ROE Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
ROE Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

ROE vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF (ROE) 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.

	ROE	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.39	4.94	-2.55
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.17	8.71	-5.54
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	2.41	-0.99
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.09	24.37	-20.29
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	17.99	96.52	-78.54

ROE vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ROE Sharpe Ratio is 2.39, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 4.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ROE 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

ROE vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ROE drawdown since its inception was -19.10%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ROE and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	ROE	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-19.10%	-0.36%	-18.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.66%	-0.12%	-8.54%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.17%	0.00%	-2.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.57%	-0.02%	-2.55%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.96%	0.03%	+1.93%

Volatility

ROE vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF (ROE) has a higher volatility of 6.40% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.09%. This indicates that ROE'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

	ROE	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.40%	0.09%	+6.31%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.76%	0.39%	+11.37%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.84%	0.58%	+14.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.99%	0.87%	+15.12%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.99%	0.87%	+15.12%

ROE vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

ROE has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

ROE vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

ROE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.95%, less 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%
ROE Astoria US Equal Weight Quality Kings ETF	0.95%	0.97%	1.18%	0.68%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ROE and BAMU in my portfolio?

ROE and BAMU have a correlation of -0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ROE or BAMU?

ROE has higher volatility (6.40%) compared to BAMU (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ROE dropped -19.10% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, ROE or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, ROE leads with 35.20% vs 2.87% for BAMU. On fees, ROE is cheaper at 0.49% 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, ROE or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, ROE has performed better with a 35.20% return vs 2.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ROE or BAMU?

ROE is cheaper with a 0.49% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.

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

BAMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.05%, compared with 0.95% for ROE.

What is the main difference between ROE and BAMU?

ROE is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Astoria and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for ROE and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.94 vs 2.39), 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.