THMZ vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

THMZ (Lazard Equity Megatrends ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - THMZ is a Global Equities fund actively managed by Lazard, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, THMZ returned 15.10% vs 2.93% for BAMU. At a correlation of -0.02, they often move in opposite directions. THMZ charges 0.50%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

THMZ vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Lazard Equity Megatrends ETF (THMZ) 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, THMZ achieves a 3.26% return, which is significantly higher than BAMU's 1.06% return.

THMZ

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: 4.63%
• YTD: 3.26%
• 6M: 3.17%
• 1Y: 15.10%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 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)

THMZ vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
THMZ Lazard Equity Megatrends ETF	3.26%	31.76%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.06%	2.21%

Correlation

The correlation between THMZ and BAMU is -0.06, 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	-0.06
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 8, 2025	-0.02

Return for Risk

THMZ vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

THMZ

THMZ Risk / Return Rank: 26
THMZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 28
THMZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 27
THMZ Omega Ratio Rank: 27
THMZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 22
THMZ Martin Ratio Rank: 26

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.

THMZ vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Lazard Equity Megatrends ETF (THMZ) 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.

	THMZ	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.97	4.98	-4.01
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.45	8.77	-7.32
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.17	2.41	-1.24
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.95	24.89	-23.94
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.41	97.89	-94.47
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

THMZ vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current THMZ Sharpe Ratio is 0.97, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 4.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of THMZ 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

	THMZ	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.97	4.98	-4.01
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.64	4.14	-2.50

Drawdowns

THMZ vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum THMZ drawdown since its inception was -15.99%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for THMZ and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	THMZ	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-15.99%	-0.36%	-15.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-15.99%	-0.12%	-15.87%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.68%	0.00%	-0.68%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.60%	-0.02%	-2.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.43%	0.03%	+4.40%

Volatility

THMZ vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

Lazard Equity Megatrends ETF (THMZ) has a higher volatility of 4.23% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.07%. This indicates that THMZ'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

	THMZ	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.23%	0.07%	+4.16%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.53%	0.43%	+12.10%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.58%	0.59%	+14.99%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.72%	0.87%	+17.85%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.72%	0.87%	+17.85%

THMZ vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

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

Dividends

THMZ vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

THMZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.41%, less than BAMU's 3.06% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	3.06%	3.20%	3.97%	0.84%
THMZ Lazard Equity Megatrends ETF	0.41%	0.30%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both THMZ and BAMU in my portfolio?

THMZ and BAMU have a correlation of -0.06, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, THMZ or BAMU?

THMZ has higher volatility (4.23%) compared to BAMU (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, THMZ dropped -15.99% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, THMZ or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, THMZ leads with 15.10% vs 2.93% for BAMU. On fees, THMZ is cheaper at 0.50% 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, THMZ or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, THMZ has performed better with a 15.10% return vs 2.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, THMZ or BAMU?

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

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

BAMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.06%, compared with 0.41% for THMZ.

What is the main difference between THMZ and BAMU?

THMZ is categorized as Global Equities, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Lazard and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for THMZ and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.98 vs 0.97), 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.