UX vs. BAMU

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

UX (Roundhill Uranium ETF) and BAMU (Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - UX is a Commodity Producers Equities fund actively managed by Roundhill, while BAMU is a Ultrashort Bond fund actively managed by Brookstone. Both are actively managed. Over the past year, UX returned 17.18% vs 2.93% for BAMU. At a correlation of -0.06, they often move in opposite directions. UX charges 0.75%/yr vs 1.09%/yr for BAMU.

Performance

UX vs. BAMU - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) 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, UX achieves a -0.61% return, which is significantly lower than BAMU's 1.06% return.

UX

• 1D: -2.53%
• 1M: -3.11%
• YTD: -0.61%
• 6M: 6.59%
• 1Y: 17.18%
• 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)

UX vs. BAMU - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
UX Roundhill Uranium ETF	-0.61%	15.76%
BAMU Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF	1.06%	2.82%

Correlation

The correlation between UX 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 Jan 30, 2025	-0.06

UX vs. BAMU - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	UX	BAMU
Energy	100.0%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Communication Services	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Financial Services	-	98.8%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Technology	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

UX vs. BAMU — Risk / Return Rank

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

UX

UX Risk / Return Rank: 17
UX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 17
UX Sortino Ratio Rank: 18
UX Omega Ratio Rank: 18
UX Calmar Ratio Rank: 18
UX Martin Ratio Rank: 16

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.

UX vs. BAMU - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) 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.

	UX	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	0.50	4.98	-4.48
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	0.93	8.77	-7.84
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.11	2.41	-1.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	0.73	24.89	-24.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	1.45	97.89	-96.44
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

UX vs. BAMU - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current UX Sharpe Ratio is 0.50, which is lower than the BAMU Sharpe Ratio of 4.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of UX 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

	UX	BAMU	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.50	4.98	-4.48
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.31	4.14	-3.84

Drawdowns

UX vs. BAMU - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum UX drawdown since its inception was -23.72%, which is greater than BAMU's maximum drawdown of -0.36%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for UX and BAMU.

Drawdown Indicators

	UX	BAMU	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-23.72%	-0.36%	-23.36%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-23.72%	-0.12%	-23.60%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-19.59%	0.00%	-19.59%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-10.13%	-0.02%	-10.11%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	11.87%	0.03%	+11.84%

Volatility

UX vs. BAMU - Volatility Comparison

Roundhill Uranium ETF (UX) has a higher volatility of 8.07% compared to Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) at 0.07%. This indicates that UX'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

	UX	BAMU	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.07%	0.07%	+8.00%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	24.59%	0.43%	+24.16%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	34.45%	0.59%	+33.86%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	36.20%	0.87%	+35.33%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	36.20%	0.87%	+35.33%

UX vs. BAMU - Expense Ratio Comparison

UX has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is lower than BAMU's 1.09% expense ratio.

Dividends

UX vs. BAMU - Dividend Comparison

UX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.49%, 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%
UX Roundhill Uranium ETF	1.49%	1.48%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both UX and BAMU in my portfolio?

UX 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, UX or BAMU?

UX has higher volatility (8.07%) compared to BAMU (0.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, UX dropped -23.72% vs BAMU's -0.36%.

Which ETF is better, UX or BAMU?

On 1-year performance, UX leads with 17.18% vs 2.93% for BAMU. On fees, UX is cheaper at 0.75% 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, UX or BAMU?

Over the 1-year period, UX has performed better with a 17.18% return vs 2.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, UX or BAMU?

UX is cheaper with a 0.75% expense ratio, compared with 1.09% for BAMU.

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

BAMU has the higher dividend yield at 3.06%, compared with 1.49% for UX.

What is the main difference between UX and BAMU?

UX is categorized as Commodity Producers Equities, while BAMU is Ultrashort Bond. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and Brookstone. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for UX and 1.09% for BAMU.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

BAMU currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.98 vs 0.50), 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.