RSEE vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

RSEE (Rareview Systematic Equity ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RSEE is a Long-Short fund actively managed by Rareview Funds, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, RSEE returned 38.14% vs 2.91% for BAMU. At a correlation of -0.02, they often move in opposite directions. RSEE charges 1.27%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

RSEE vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Rareview Systematic Equity ETF (RSEE) 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, RSEE achieves a 16.01% return, which is significantly higher than BAMU's 1.18% return.

RSEE

• 1D: -0.19%
• 1M: 2.50%
• YTD: 16.01%
• 6M: 15.56%
• 1Y: 38.14%
• 3Y*: 19.12%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

BAMU

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.16%
• YTD: 1.18%
• 6M: 1.23%
• 1Y: 2.91%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

RSEE vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
RSEE Rareview Systematic Equity ETF	16.01%	20.54%	18.54%	6.54%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.18%	3.21%	4.14%	1.20%

Correlation

The correlation between RSEE and BAMU is -0.12, 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	-0.12
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2023	-0.02

Return for Risk

RSEE vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

RSEE

RSEE Risk / Return Rank: 63
RSEE Sharpe Ratio Rank: 64
RSEE Sortino Ratio Rank: 60
RSEE Omega Ratio Rank: 61
RSEE Calmar Ratio Rank: 62
RSEE Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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.

RSEE vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Rareview Systematic Equity ETF (RSEE) 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.

	RSEE	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.06	5.01	-2.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.75	8.84	-6.08
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.36	2.43	-1.07
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.97	24.72	-21.75
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.03	97.90	-85.87

RSEE vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RSEE Sharpe Ratio is 2.06, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 5.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RSEE 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

RSEE vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RSEE drawdown since its inception was -21.60%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSEE and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	RSEE	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.60%	-0.36%	-21.24%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.89%	-0.12%	-12.77%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-21.60%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.90%	0.00%	-0.90%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.77%	-0.02%	-3.75%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.18%	0.03%	+3.15%

Volatility

RSEE vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

Rareview Systematic Equity ETF (RSEE) has a higher volatility of 7.43% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.09%. This indicates that RSEE'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

	RSEE	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	7.43%	0.09%	+7.34%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	15.27%	0.40%	+14.87%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.63%	0.58%	+18.05%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.17%	0.87%	+18.30%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.17%	0.87%	+18.30%

RSEE vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

RSEE has a 1.27% expense ratio, which is higher than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

RSEE vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

RSEE has not paid dividends to shareholders, while BAMU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.05%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	3.05%	3.20%	3.97%	0.84%	0.00%
RSEE Rareview Systematic Equity ETF	0.00%	0.24%	9.02%	0.84%	1.97%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both RSEE and BAMU in my portfolio?

RSEE and BAMU have a correlation of -0.12, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, RSEE or BAMU?

RSEE has higher volatility (7.43%) compared to BAMU (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSEE dropped -21.60% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, RSEE or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, RSEE leads with 38.14% vs 2.91% for BAMU. On fees, BAMU is cheaper at 1.09% 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, RSEE or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, RSEE has performed better with a 38.14% return vs 2.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, RSEE or BAMU?

BAMU is cheaper with a 1.09% expense ratio, compared with 1.27% for RSEE.

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

BAMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.05%, compared with 0.00% for RSEE.

What is the main difference between RSEE and BAMU?

RSEE is categorized as Long-Short, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Rareview Funds and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 1.27% for RSEE and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.01 vs 2.06), 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.