BAMU vs IVV
Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BAMU | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.05% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $67M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 3.01% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 6 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +0.92% | +12.28% | |
| 1Y Return | +2.14% | +20.94% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +3.30% | +21.81% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +13.05% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 0.5% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -0.7% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Brookstone Asset Management | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Sep 27, 2023 | May 15, 2000 |
BAMU vs IVV Performance
Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) is a ETF from Brookstone Asset Management and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BAMU returned +2.14% while IVV returned +20.94%. Year to date, BAMU is up 0.92% versus a gain of 12.28% for IVV.
Over three years, BAMU compounded at +3.30% per year against +21.81% for IVV. Across the full 3-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +6.98% annualized vs +3.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 0.5% for BAMU. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -0.7% for BAMU and -56.5% for IVV. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.01. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BAMU charges 1.05% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $105 vs $3 annually, a gap of $102 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BAMU currently yields 3.01% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
BAMU and IVV share 0 holdings out of 510 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BAMU or IVV?
BAMU has an expense ratio of 1.05% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $102 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BAMU or IVV?
Over the past year BAMU returned +2.14% vs +20.94% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (3 years), BAMU annualized +3.30% vs +6.98% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BAMU or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 0.5% for BAMU. Worst drawdown: BAMU -0.7% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both BAMU and IVV?
BAMU and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.01, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BAMU and IVV?
BAMU and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 510 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BAMU or IVV?
BAMU yields 3.01% while IVV yields 1.10%, so BAMU currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.