TMAT vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

TMAT (Main Thematic Innovation ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - TMAT is a Technology Equities fund tracking the MSCI ACWI Index, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. TMAT is passively managed, while BAMU is actively managed. Over the past year, TMAT returned 34.95% vs 2.87% for BAMU. At a 0.00 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. TMAT charges 1.49%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

TMAT vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Main Thematic Innovation ETF (TMAT) 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, TMAT achieves a 18.93% return, which is significantly higher than BAMU's 1.18% return.

TMAT

• 1D: -3.52%
• 1M: 3.97%
• YTD: 18.93%
• 6M: 16.10%
• 1Y: 34.95%
• 3Y*: 27.57%
• 5Y*: 4.62%
• 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)

TMAT vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
TMAT Main Thematic Innovation ETF	18.93%	20.06%	27.20%	23.53%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.18%	3.21%	4.14%	1.20%

Correlation

The correlation between TMAT and BAMU is -0.17, 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	-0.17
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 27, 2023	0.00

The correlation between TMAT and BAMU shifts across timeframes, from -0.17 (1 year) to 0.00 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

TMAT vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

TMAT

TMAT Risk / Return Rank: 36
TMAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 41
TMAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 38
TMAT Omega Ratio Rank: 37
TMAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 35
TMAT Martin Ratio Rank: 29

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.

TMAT vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Main Thematic Innovation ETF (TMAT) 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.

	TMAT	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.36	4.94	-3.58
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.85	8.71	-6.86
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	2.41	-1.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.62	24.37	-22.75
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.77	96.52	-92.76

TMAT vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current TMAT Sharpe Ratio is 1.36, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 4.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of TMAT 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

TMAT vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum TMAT drawdown since its inception was -58.55%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for TMAT and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	TMAT	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.55%	-0.36%	-58.19%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-21.63%	-0.12%	-21.51%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-33.42%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-52.10%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.36%	0.00%	-4.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-31.93%	-0.02%	-31.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.30%	0.03%	+9.27%

Volatility

TMAT vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

Main Thematic Innovation ETF (TMAT) has a higher volatility of 11.45% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.09%. This indicates that TMAT'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

	TMAT	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.45%	0.09%	+11.36%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	18.86%	0.39%	+18.47%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	25.75%	0.58%	+25.17%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	30.83%	0.87%	+29.96%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	30.75%	0.87%	+29.88%

TMAT vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

TMAT has a 1.49% expense ratio, which is higher than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

TMAT vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

TMAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.02%, less than BAMU's 3.05% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	3.05%	3.20%	3.97%	0.84%	0.00%	0.00%
TMAT Main Thematic Innovation ETF	0.02%	0.02%	0.00%	0.00%	0.34%	0.20%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both TMAT and BAMU in my portfolio?

TMAT and BAMU have a correlation of -0.17, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, TMAT or BAMU?

TMAT has higher volatility (11.45%) compared to BAMU (0.09%). In terms of maximum drawdown, TMAT dropped -58.55% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, TMAT or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, TMAT leads with 34.95% 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, TMAT or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, TMAT has performed better with a 34.95% return vs 2.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, TMAT or BAMU?

BAMU is cheaper with a 1.09% expense ratio, compared with 1.49% for TMAT.

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

BAMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.05%, compared with 0.02% for TMAT.

What is the main difference between TMAT and BAMU?

TMAT is categorized as Technology Equities, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Main Management and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 1.49% for TMAT and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.94 vs 1.36), 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.