BAMU vs VTI
Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 3,543 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BAMU | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.05% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $67M | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 3.01% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 6 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +0.92% | +13.14% | |
| 1Y Return | +2.14% | +22.35% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +3.30% | +21.83% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.01% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 0.5% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -0.7% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | Brookstone Asset Management | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Sep 27, 2023 | May 24, 2001 |
BAMU vs VTI Performance
Brookstone Ultra-Short Bond ETF (BAMU) is a ETF from Brookstone Asset Management and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year BAMU returned +2.14% while VTI returned +22.35%. Year to date, BAMU is up 0.92% versus a gain of 13.14% for VTI.
Over three years, BAMU compounded at +3.30% per year against +21.83% for VTI. Across the full 3-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.09% annualized vs +3.30%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.3% 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 -56.6% for VTI. 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 0.02. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BAMU charges 1.05% per year while VTI 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 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
BAMU and VTI share 0 holdings out of 2792 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 VTI?
BAMU has an expense ratio of 1.05% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $102 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BAMU or VTI?
Over the past year BAMU returned +2.14% vs +22.35% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (3 years), BAMU annualized +3.30% vs +8.09% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BAMU or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 0.5% for BAMU. Worst drawdown: BAMU -0.7% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both BAMU and VTI?
BAMU and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.02, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BAMU and VTI?
BAMU and VTI share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2792 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BAMU or VTI?
BAMU yields 3.01% while VTI yields 1.07%, 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.