TBLU vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

TBLU (Tortoise Global Water Fund) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TBLU is a Water Equities fund tracking the Tortoise Global Water ESG Net Total Return Index, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. TBLU is passively managed, while BAMU is actively managed. Over the past year, TBLU returned -1.51% vs 2.93% for BAMU. At a 0.00 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TBLU charges 0.40%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

TBLU vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Tortoise Global Water Fund (TBLU) 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, TBLU achieves a -1.99% return, which is significantly lower than BAMU's 1.06% return.

TBLU

• 1D: 0.17%
• 1M: -3.28%
• YTD: -1.99%
• 6M: -4.11%
• 1Y: -1.51%
• 3Y*: 9.71%
• 5Y*: 3.78%
• 10Y*: —

BAMU

• 1D: 0.02%
• 1M: 0.20%
• YTD: 1.06%
• 6M: 1.25%
• 1Y: 2.93%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

TBLU vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
TBLU Tortoise Global Water Fund	-1.99%	11.82%	8.54%	16.23%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.06%	3.21%	4.14%	1.20%

Correlation

The correlation between TBLU and BAMU is 0.03, 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	0.03
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 28, 2023	0.00

TBLU vs. BAMU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	TBLU	BAMU
Industrials	65.8%	-
Utilities	24.7%	-
Basic Materials	7.1%	-
Consumer Defensive	0.8%	-
Consumer Cyclical	0.7%	-
Technology	0.5%	-
Energy	0.5%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Financial Services	-	98.8%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

TBLU vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

TBLU

TBLU Risk / Return Rank: 8
TBLU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8
TBLU Sortino Ratio Rank: 7
TBLU Omega Ratio Rank: 7
TBLU Calmar Ratio Rank: 8
TBLU Martin Ratio Rank: 8

BAMU

BAMU Risk / Return Rank: 98
BAMU Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
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.

TBLU vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Tortoise Global Water Fund (TBLU) 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.

	TBLU	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.11	4.98	-5.08
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.05	8.77	-8.82
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.99	2.41	-1.42
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.12	24.89	-25.01
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.28	97.89	-98.17
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

TBLU vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TBLU Sharpe Ratio is -0.11, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 4.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TBLU 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	TBLU	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.11	4.98	-5.08
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.22	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.50	4.14	-3.64

Drawdowns

TBLU vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TBLU drawdown since its inception was -37.58%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TBLU and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	TBLU	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.58%	-0.36%	-37.22%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-13.17%	-0.12%	-13.05%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-15.42%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-35.36%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-11.65%	0.00%	-11.65%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.15%	-0.02%	-8.13%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	5.46%	0.03%	+5.43%

Volatility

TBLU vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

Tortoise Global Water Fund (TBLU) has a higher volatility of 4.35% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.07%. This indicates that TBLU'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

	TBLU	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.35%	0.07%	+4.28%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.46%	0.43%	+11.03%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.44%	0.59%	+13.85%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.32%	0.87%	+16.45%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.96%	0.87%	+18.09%

TBLU vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

TBLU has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

TBLU vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

TBLU's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.37%, more than BAMU's 3.06% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	3.06%	3.20%	3.97%	0.84%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TBLU Tortoise Global Water Fund	3.37%	3.31%	1.34%	1.46%	1.64%	1.55%	1.42%	1.58%	1.35%	1.32%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TBLU and BAMU in my portfolio?

TBLU and BAMU have a correlation of 0.03, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TBLU or BAMU?

TBLU has higher volatility (4.35%) compared to BAMU (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TBLU dropped -37.58% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, TBLU or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, BAMU leads with 2.93% vs -1.51% for TBLU. On fees, TBLU is cheaper at 0.40% per year. On volatility, BAMU has been the lower-risk option at 0.07%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, TBLU or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, BAMU has performed better with a 2.93% return vs -1.51%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TBLU or BAMU?

TBLU is cheaper with a 0.40% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.

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

TBLU has the higher dividend yield at 3.37%, compared with 3.06% for BAMU.

What is the main difference between TBLU and BAMU?

TBLU is categorized as Water Equities, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Tortoise and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for TBLU and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.98 vs -0.11), 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.