SGDM vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

SGDM (Sprott Gold Miners ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SGDM is a Gold fund tracking the Solactive Gold Miners Custom Factors Index, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. SGDM is passively managed, while BAMU is actively managed. Over the past year, SGDM returned 49.12% vs 2.91% for BAMU. At a correlation of -0.02, they often move in opposite directions. SGDM charges 0.50%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

SGDM vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Sprott Gold Miners ETF (SGDM) 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, SGDM achieves a -3.45% return, which is significantly lower than BAMU's 1.18% return.

SGDM

• 1D: -1.23%
• 1M: -4.58%
• YTD: -3.45%
• 6M: -7.95%
• 1Y: 49.12%
• 3Y*: 39.66%
• 5Y*: 19.95%
• 10Y*: 11.34%

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)

SGDM vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
SGDM Sprott Gold Miners ETF	-3.45%	153.46%	12.14%	8.06%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.18%	3.21%	4.14%	1.20%

Correlation

The correlation between SGDM and BAMU is -0.05, 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	-0.05
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2023	-0.02

Return for Risk

SGDM vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

SGDM

SGDM Risk / Return Rank: 29
SGDM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 30
SGDM Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
SGDM Omega Ratio Rank: 31
SGDM Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
SGDM Martin Ratio Rank: 27

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.

SGDM vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sprott Gold Miners ETF (SGDM) 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.

	SGDM	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.06	5.01	-3.95
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.48	8.84	-7.36
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	2.43	-1.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.37	24.72	-23.35
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.66	97.90	-94.23

SGDM vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SGDM Sharpe Ratio is 1.06, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 5.01. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SGDM 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

SGDM vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SGDM drawdown since its inception was -54.95%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SGDM and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	SGDM	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-54.95%	-0.36%	-54.59%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-35.96%	-0.12%	-35.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-35.96%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-45.06%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-49.69%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-29.48%	0.00%	-29.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-25.47%	-0.02%	-25.45%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.46%	0.03%	+13.43%

Volatility

SGDM vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

Sprott Gold Miners ETF (SGDM) has a higher volatility of 16.43% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.09%. This indicates that SGDM'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

	SGDM	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	16.43%	0.09%	+16.34%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	39.22%	0.40%	+38.82%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	46.84%	0.58%	+46.26%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.19%	0.87%	+35.32%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	37.03%	0.87%	+36.16%

SGDM vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

SGDM has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

SGDM vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

SGDM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.08%, less than BAMU's 3.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	3.05%	3.20%	3.97%	0.84%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SGDM Sprott Gold Miners ETF	1.08%	1.04%	1.04%	1.39%	1.42%	1.33%	0.30%	0.25%	0.50%	0.58%	0.02%	1.47%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SGDM and BAMU in my portfolio?

SGDM and BAMU have a correlation of -0.05, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SGDM or BAMU?

SGDM has higher volatility (16.43%) compared to BAMU (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SGDM dropped -54.95% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, SGDM or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, SGDM leads with 49.12% vs 2.91% for BAMU. On fees, SGDM is cheaper at 0.50% 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, SGDM or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, SGDM has performed better with a 49.12% return vs 2.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SGDM or BAMU?

SGDM is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.

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

BAMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.05%, compared with 1.08% for SGDM.

What is the main difference between SGDM and BAMU?

SGDM is categorized as Gold, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Sprott and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for SGDM and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (5.01 vs 1.06), 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.