RPHS vs. BAMY

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

RPHS (Regents Park Hedged Market Strategy ETF) and BAMY (Brookstone Yield ETF) are both Diversified Portfolio funds. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RPHS returned 15.90% vs 10.01% for BAMY. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RPHS charges 0.75%/yr vs 1.48%/yr for BAMY.

Performance

RPHS vs. BAMY - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Regents Park Hedged Market Strategy ETF (RPHS) and Brookstone Yield ETF (BAMY). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, RPHS achieves a 3.99% return, which is significantly higher than BAMY's 1.41% return.

RPHS

• 1D: -0.87%
• 1M: -1.07%
• YTD: 3.99%
• 6M: 3.78%
• 1Y: 15.90%
• 3Y*: 13.58%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BAMY

• 1D: -0.07%
• 1M: 0.45%
• YTD: 1.41%
• 6M: 1.25%
• 1Y: 10.01%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

RPHS vs. BAMY - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RPHS Regents Park Hedged Market Strategy ETF	3.99%	11.74%	17.84%	8.77%
BAMY Brookstone Yield ETF	1.41%	12.93%	10.60%	5.20%

Correlation

The correlation between RPHS and BAMY is 0.76, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 28, 2023	0.74

The correlation between RPHS and BAMY has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.76 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

RPHS vs. BAMY — Risk / Return Rank

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

RPHS

RPHS Risk / Return Rank: 46
RPHS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
RPHS Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
RPHS Omega Ratio Rank: 44
RPHS Calmar Ratio Rank: 45
RPHS Martin Ratio Rank: 51

BAMY

BAMY Risk / Return Rank: 81
BAMY Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
BAMY Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
BAMY Omega Ratio Rank: 84
BAMY Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
BAMY Martin Ratio Rank: 88

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.

RPHS vs. BAMY - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Regents Park Hedged Market Strategy ETF (RPHS) and Brookstone Yield ETF (BAMY). 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.

	RPHS	BAMY	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.46	2.22	-0.76
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.06	3.21	-1.15
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.47	-0.21
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.04	4.05	-2.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.95	18.10	-10.15

RPHS vs. BAMY - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RPHS Sharpe Ratio is 1.46, which is lower than the BAMY Sharpe Ratio of 2.22. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RPHS and BAMY, 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

RPHS vs. BAMY - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RPHS drawdown since its inception was -16.51%, which is greater than BAMY's maximum drawdown of -6.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RPHS and BAMY.

Drawdown Indicators

	RPHS	BAMY	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.51%	-6.03%	-10.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.81%	-2.48%	-5.33%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-10.84%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.06%	-0.15%	-2.91%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.27%	-0.52%	-5.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.00%	0.55%	+1.45%

Volatility

RPHS vs. BAMY - Volatility Comparison

Regents Park Hedged Market Strategy ETF (RPHS) has a higher volatility of 3.89% compared to Brookstone Yield ETF (BAMY) at 0.93%. This indicates that RPHS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than BAMY based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	RPHS	BAMY	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.89%	0.93%	+2.96%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.84%	2.84%	+5.00%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.93%	4.57%	+6.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	11.45%	5.99%	+5.46%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	11.45%	5.99%	+5.46%

RPHS vs. BAMY - Expense Ratio Comparison

RPHS has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMY's 1.48% expense ratio.

Dividends

RPHS vs. BAMY - Dividend Comparison

RPHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 10.70%, more than BAMY's 7.57% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BAMY Brookstone Yield ETF	7.57%	7.16%	8.20%	1.96%	0.00%
RPHS Regents Park Hedged Market Strategy ETF	10.70%	11.13%	3.68%	5.23%	1.29%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RPHS and BAMY in my portfolio?

RPHS and BAMY have a correlation of 0.76, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RPHS or BAMY?

RPHS has higher volatility (3.89%) compared to BAMY (0.93%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RPHS dropped -16.51% vs BAMY's -6.03%.

Which ETF is better, RPHS or BAMY?

On 1-year performance, RPHS leads with 15.90% vs 10.01% for BAMY. On fees, RPHS is cheaper at 0.75% per year. On volatility, BAMY has been the lower-risk option at 0.93%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, RPHS or BAMY?

Over the 1-year period, RPHS has performed better with a 15.90% return vs 10.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RPHS or BAMY?

RPHS is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.48% for BAMY.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, RPHS or BAMY?

RPHS has the higher dividend yield at 10.70%, compared with 7.57% for BAMY.

What is the main difference between RPHS and BAMY?

They also come from different issuers: Regents Park and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for RPHS and 1.48% for BAMY.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMY currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.22 vs 1.46), 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.