SNAV vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

SNAV (Mohr Sector Nav ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SNAV is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund actively managed by Mohr Funds, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, SNAV returned 20.56% vs 2.87% for BAMU. At a correlation of -0.02, they often move in opposite directions. SNAV charges 1.30%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

SNAV vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Mohr Sector Nav ETF (SNAV) 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, SNAV achieves a 8.64% return, which is significantly higher than BAMU's 1.18% return.

SNAV

• 1D: -0.81%
• 1M: -0.19%
• YTD: 8.64%
• 6M: 7.86%
• 1Y: 20.56%
• 3Y*: 14.33%
• 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)

SNAV vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
SNAV Mohr Sector Nav ETF	8.64%	15.54%	11.11%	9.69%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.18%	3.21%	4.14%	1.20%

Correlation

The correlation between SNAV and BAMU is -0.10, 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	-0.10
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2023	-0.02

Return for Risk

SNAV vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

SNAV

SNAV Risk / Return Rank: 62
SNAV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
SNAV Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
SNAV Omega Ratio Rank: 58
SNAV Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
SNAV Martin Ratio Rank: 66

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.

SNAV vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Mohr Sector Nav ETF (SNAV) 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.

	SNAV	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.82	4.94	-3.12
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.45	8.71	-6.27
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.33	2.41	-1.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.20	24.37	-21.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.85	96.52	-85.68

SNAV vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SNAV Sharpe Ratio is 1.82, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 4.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SNAV 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

SNAV vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SNAV drawdown since its inception was -16.61%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SNAV and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	SNAV	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-16.61%	-0.36%	-16.25%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-6.45%	-0.12%	-6.33%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-16.61%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.28%	0.00%	-3.28%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.51%	-0.02%	-2.49%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.90%	0.03%	+1.87%

Volatility

SNAV vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

Mohr Sector Nav ETF (SNAV) has a higher volatility of 4.80% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.09%. This indicates that SNAV'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

	SNAV	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.80%	0.09%	+4.71%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.32%	0.39%	+7.93%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.35%	0.58%	+10.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.73%	0.87%	+12.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.73%	0.87%	+12.86%

SNAV vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

SNAV has a 1.30% expense ratio, which is higher than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

SNAV vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

SNAV 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
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	3.05%	3.20%	3.97%	0.84%
SNAV Mohr Sector Nav ETF	0.00%	0.00%	0.94%	3.29%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SNAV and BAMU in my portfolio?

SNAV 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.

Which is riskier, SNAV or BAMU?

SNAV has higher volatility (4.80%) compared to BAMU (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SNAV dropped -16.61% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, SNAV or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, SNAV leads with 20.56% vs 2.87% 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, SNAV or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, SNAV has performed better with a 20.56% return vs 2.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SNAV or BAMU?

BAMU is cheaper with a 1.09% expense ratio, compared with 1.30% for SNAV.

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

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

What is the main difference between SNAV and BAMU?

SNAV is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Mohr Funds and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 1.30% for SNAV and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.94 vs 1.82), 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.