URA vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

URA (Global X Uranium ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - URA is a Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Solactive Global Uranium & Nuclear Components Total Return Index, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. URA is passively managed, while BAMU is actively managed. Over the past year, URA returned 61.26% vs 2.93% for BAMU. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. URA charges 0.69%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

URA vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Global X Uranium ETF (URA) 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, URA achieves a 17.93% return, which is significantly higher than BAMU's 1.06% return.

URA

• 1D: -5.67%
• 1M: -8.00%
• YTD: 17.93%
• 6M: 13.25%
• 1Y: 61.26%
• 3Y*: 39.27%
• 5Y*: 21.39%
• 10Y*: 17.12%

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)

URA vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
URA Global X Uranium ETF	17.93%	67.18%	-0.58%	8.16%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.06%	3.21%	4.14%	1.20%

Correlation

The correlation between URA and BAMU is -0.19, 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	-0.19
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 28, 2023	-0.01

The correlation between URA and BAMU shifts across timeframes, from -0.19 (1 year) to -0.01 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

URA vs. BAMU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	URA	BAMU
Energy	57.0%	-
Industrials	21.9%	-
Utilities	9.4%	-
Basic Materials	5.0%	-
Technology	0.9%	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	98.8%
Healthcare	-	-
Real Estate	-	-

Return for Risk

URA vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

URA

URA Risk / Return Rank: 34
URA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 33
URA Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
URA Omega Ratio Rank: 31
URA Calmar Ratio Rank: 43
URA Martin Ratio Rank: 30

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.

URA vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Global X Uranium ETF (URA) 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.

	URA	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.23	4.98	-3.75
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.86	8.77	-6.90
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	2.41	-1.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.17	24.89	-22.72
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	4.58	97.89	-93.31
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

URA vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current URA Sharpe Ratio is 1.23, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 4.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of URA 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

	URA	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.23	4.98	-3.75
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.49	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.46	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	-0.05	4.14	-4.19

Drawdowns

URA vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum URA drawdown since its inception was -93.54%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for URA and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	URA	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-93.54%	-0.36%	-93.18%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-28.43%	-0.12%	-28.31%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-37.81%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-37.90%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-61.45%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-42.81%	0.00%	-42.81%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-75.01%	-0.02%	-74.99%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	13.40%	0.03%	+13.37%

Volatility

URA vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

Global X Uranium ETF (URA) has a higher volatility of 15.94% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.07%. This indicates that URA'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

	URA	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.94%	0.07%	+15.87%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	38.29%	0.43%	+37.86%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	50.19%	0.59%	+49.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	43.62%	0.87%	+42.75%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	37.73%	0.87%	+36.86%

URA vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

URA has a 0.69% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

URA vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

URA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.14%, more than BAMU's 3.06% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
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%	0.00%	0.00%
URA Global X Uranium ETF	4.14%	4.88%	2.86%	6.07%	0.76%	5.84%	1.69%	1.66%	0.44%	2.03%	7.28%	1.96%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both URA and BAMU in my portfolio?

URA and BAMU have a correlation of -0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, URA or BAMU?

URA has higher volatility (15.94%) compared to BAMU (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, URA dropped -93.54% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, URA or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, URA leads with 61.26% vs 2.93% for BAMU. On fees, URA is cheaper at 0.69% 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, URA or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, URA has performed better with a 61.26% return vs 2.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, URA or BAMU?

URA is cheaper with a 0.69% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.

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

URA has the higher dividend yield at 4.14%, compared with 3.06% for BAMU.

What is the main difference between URA and BAMU?

URA is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Global X and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.69% for URA and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.98 vs 1.23), 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.