AOA vs BAMA: Grades, Fees and Holdings Compared

iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF

AOAANYSE Arca

Brookstone Active ETF

BAMADCboe

Overlap

0.0%by weight

Expense ratio

AOA −0.86pt a year

AOA0.15%BAMA1.01%

Avg volume · 30D

AOA 33.3×the volume

AOA143KBAMA4.3K

3Y return · a year

AOA +3.4pt

AOA+16.5%BAMA+13.1%

AOA vs BAMA Performance

Nov 6, 2025 – Nov 6, 2026

+9.4%AOA+5.8%BAMA

Expense ratio: AOA 0.15%, better; BAMA 1.01%
Fund size: AOA $3.26B; BAMA $45M
1Y total return: AOA +9.4%, better; BAMA +5.8%
Yield (12M): AOA 2.23%, better; BAMA 1.48%
Holdings: AOA 34511; BAMA 7
Avg volume (30D): AOA 143K sh, better; BAMA 4.3K sh
NAV per share: AOA $94.55; BAMA $35.15
52W range

ETF.net Grade

Pillar letters and Scores for AOA, BAMA, with each pillar’s weight
Pillar	AOA	BAMA
Cost30% weight	A93Higher	F14
Mission25% weight	A100Higher	C44
Risk15% weight	C53Higher	C46
Tradability15% weight	A96Higher	C51
Holdings10% weight	A81Higher	D34
Durability5% weight	A98Higher	C52

Rank among Multi-Asset Allocation funds

How we build Categories ›

Same Category. AOA and BAMA are both graded against the same 36 Multi-Asset Allocation funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Multi-Asset Allocation⁠

Category · 36 funds

See all 36 ›

AOA ranks 2nd and BAMA 30th of 36 funds in the Multi-Asset Allocation Category.

Rank 1AUCBGState Street SPDR UC Investments 90/10 Endowment Strategy Index ETFScore 95
Rank 2AAOAiShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETFScore 88
Rank 3AIRTRiShares LifePath Retirement ETFScore 86
Rank 29DBAMOBrookstone Opportunities ETFScore 36
Rank 30DBAMABrookstone Active ETFScore 35
Rank 30DFDATTactical Advantage ETFScore 35

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

AOAAiShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF

BAMADBrookstone Active ETF

In short

AOA A whole portfolio in one ticker. Since 2008, AOA has held a fixed 80/20 mix of global stock and bond index funds, with its index rebalancing the split back to target twice a year. No spreadsheet required.

BAMA Brookstone's tactical sleeve in a wrapper: a handful of unaffiliated ETFs that can swing from all-in on stocks to all-out in Treasuries and cash. Price of that freedom: 1.01% net of a waiver through September 30, 2027.

Stated mandate

AOA The Fund seeks to follow an index of equity and fixed-income ETFs designed for an aggressive target-risk allocation. It offers a diversified portfolio emphasizing growth and relatively higher equity exposure.

BAMA The Fund seeks total return through active allocation among unaffiliated ETFs covering domestic and foreign equities, bonds, cash and cash equivalents, and potentially leveraged ETFs. Asset-class weightings may change with market conditions.

Why people hold it

AOA One trade buys a handful of underlying iShares index funds spanning global stocks and bonds, with the 80/20 split set by index rule rather than a manager's judgment call.ishares.com spglobal.com
Costs 0.15% net of a waiver through November 30, 2026 (0.19% gross), below the median fee in its allocation category.
Live since November 2008 and now a multi-billion-dollar fund, it has run the same target-risk mandate through the financial crisis and everything after.ishares.com
Among the strongest implementations in a crowded field of allocation funds, and it pays out quarterly.

BAMA The mandate is genuinely unconstrained: global stocks, bonds including junk, cash, even leveraged ETFs, with weights shifting as the adviser's outlook shifts.sec.gov
A fee waiver trims the 1.04% gross charge to 1.01% net through September 30, 2027. Distributions arrive quarterly.
One ticket buys the allocation calls of a multi-billion-dollar RIA, live since 2023 as part of an eight-ETF Brookstone lineup.brookstonecm.com cboe.com

Worth knowing

AOA Eighty percent equity means it rides global stock swings closely. The 20% bond sleeve softens drawdowns rather than stopping them.spglobal.com
That 0.15% is net of a contractual waiver through November 30, 2026. The gross 0.19% is the figure that applies if the waiver is not renewed.
Cheaper one-ticket rivals now exist: UCBG at 0.06% and IRTR at 0.08%. IRTR also glides its risk down over time, while AOA's 80/20 stays put.

BAMA At 1.01% net, it sits above the allocation category's typical fee, and far above index-built peers like UCBG at 0.06% and IRTR at 0.08%.
A small fund that trades lightly, so spreads and order size matter more here than in the category's giants.
No index to measure it against: results ride on the adviser's timing, and any leveraged ETF it holds tracks daily moves, not long stretches.sec.gov

Full AOA profile⁠

Full BAMA profile⁠

AOA vs BAMA Holdings

How AOA and BAMA differ

Overlap by weight

0.0%

About this figure: BAMA holds other funds. We compare those funds, not the stocks inside them.

Level by level

Holdings0 in both0.0%
Sector15 Sectors77.9%
Countryby domicile85.0%

Sector

Sector weights in AOA and BAMA, widest gap first
Sector	Gap	AOA	BAMA
Government	BAMA +10.6 points	0.0%	10.6%
Securitized	BAMA +5.3 points	0.0%	5.3%
Corporate	BAMA +5.2 points	0.0%	5.2%
Financials	AOA +5.0 points	16.6%	11.6%
Industrials	AOA +4.1 points	10.7%	6.6%
Energy	AOA +2.7 points	4.6%	1.9%
Health Care	AOA +2.6 points	9.3%	6.7%
Consumer Staples	AOA +2.0 points	5.0%	3.0%
Materials	AOA +1.9 points	4.2%	2.3%
Consumer Discretionary	AOA +1.5 points	8.5%	7.0%
Utilities	AOA +1.1 points	2.5%	1.4%
Real Estate	AOA +1.0 points	2.2%	1.2%
Communication	BAMA +1.0 points	6.5%	7.5%
Technology	AOA +0.3 points	29.9%	29.6%
Municipal	BAMA +0.1 points	0.0%	0.1%

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Country weights in AOA and BAMA, widest gap first
Country	Gap	AOA	BAMA
United States	BAMA +9.2 points	69.0%	78.2%
Canada	AOA +3.4 points	3.4%	0.0%
Japan	AOA +3.3 points	6.0%	2.7%
United Kingdom	AOA +2.1 points	3.6%	1.5%
France	AOA +1.4 points	2.2%	0.8%
Germany	AOA +1.2 points	2.1%	0.9%
Switzerland	AOA +1.1 points	2.2%	1.1%
Australia	AOA +1.0 points	1.8%	0.8%
Other countries (33)	BAMA +4.5 points	9.5%	14.0%

Outside the US: AOA 73% developed, 27% emerging. BAMA 52% developed, 48% emerging.

Concentration

Weight in the 10 largest Holdings

AOA17.2%
BAMA100.1%

Securities held

AOA34,417
BAMA7

Asset class

AOA: Multi-Asset
BAMA: Stocks

Holdings

Only in AOA34,417
In both0
Only in BAMA7

Only in AOA

34,417 securities, 99.5% of AOA by weight

Apple3.56%
NVIDIA3.11%
Microsoft2.82%
Amazon.com Inc1.81%
Alphabet Class A1.17%
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing1.08%
Broadcom Inc0.98%
Alphabet Class C0.95%
Meta Platforms Class A0.94%
Eli Lilly0.77%
Berkshire Hathaway Inc Class B0.75%
Tesla Inc0.69%
JPMorgan Chase & Co0.64%
Micron Technology0.53%
Visa Class A0.51%
Exxonmobil Holdings Corp0.48%
Advanced Micro Devices0.47%
Johnson & Johnson0.46%
Samsung Electronics Ltd0.45%
Asml Holding0.43%
Walmart0.40%
Mastercard Class A0.38%
AbbVie0.36%
Sk Hynix0.34%
Costco Wholesale Corp0.33%
Chevron0.30%
Procter & Gamble0.28%
Cisco Systems Inc0.27%
Roche Ps Par AG0.27%
Coca-Cola0.26%
Merck & Co Inc0.26%
Palantir Technologies Class A0.25%
UnitedHealth Group0.25%
Home Depot0.25%
Novartis AG0.24%
Hsbc Holdings PLC0.24%
Shell0.23%
Ge Aerospace0.23%
Bank of America0.23%
Astrazeneca PLC0.23%
Royal Bank of Canada0.22%
Philip Morris International0.22%
Tencent Holdings0.22%
Nestle SA0.22%
Sap0.19%
Netflix0.19%
Mitsubishi Ufj Financial Group0.18%
Intel Corporation0.18%
Rtx0.18%
Palo Alto Networks0.18%

Only in BAMA

7 securities, 100% of BAMA by weight

State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 ETF USD Class23.20%
SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Growth ETF USD Class22.54%
State Street SPDR Portfolio Aggregate Bond Index ETF18.35%
iShares iBonds Dec 2027 Term Treasury ETF USD Class14.20%
iShares Core MSCI EAFE ETF10.48%
iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets ETF USD Class10.36%
Bbh Sweep Vehicle1.00%

Weight gaps

AOA and BAMA share no securities.

All AOA holdings⁠All 8 BAMA holdings⁠

How we measure overlap

Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.

AOA vs BAMA Cost

Overpaying BAMA vs AOA

$15,713

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

AOA 0.15%
$3,137
BAMA 1.01%
$18,850

Amount$10,000

Years30 years

Cost over time

AOA 0.15%
BAMA 1.01%
Overpaying

Year by year

Year	AOA	BAMA	Overpaying
10	$274	$1,780	$1,506
20	$1,071	$6,686	$5,615
30	$3,137	$18,850	$15,713

Expense ratio

0.15%AOA, cheaper
1.01%BAMA

AOA0.15%BAMA1.01%

0.06%1.36%

Middle half of Multi-Asset Allocation funds
Median 0.61%

AOA 3rd cheapest of 36 funds

BAMA 31st cheapest of 36 funds

AOA vs BAMA Dividends

Last 12 months to Nov 6, 2026

Yield (12M): AOA 2.23%, better; BAMA 1.48%
Payout (12M): AOA $2.11; BAMA $0.52
Last payment: AOA $0.30; BAMA $0.17
Ex-dividend: AOA Oct 2, 2026; BAMA Aug 28, 2026
Paid on: AOA Oct 7, 2026; BAMA Sep 4, 2026
Frequency: AOA Quarterly; BAMA Quarterly

Distribution history

Per share, 2017 to 2026, same scale for both

AOAQuarterly · 39 paymentsAll AOA payments⁠

BAMAQuarterly · 11 paymentsAll BAMA payments⁠

AOA vs BAMA Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years: AOA 9.6%BAMA 9.0%, better
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years: AOA 1.37, betterBAMA 1.09
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years: AOA −23.6%BAMA −12.3%since Sep 2023
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years: AOA 1.06BAMA 0.71; Market = 1

AOA and BAMA in the news

All news⁠

Category Review
The fund built to limit losses had the category's worst return
Sep 25, 2026AOA

Popular comparisons

AOAAvsUCBGA
iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF · State Street SPDR UC Investments 90/10 Endowment Strategy Index ETF
Expense ratio
0.15% · 0.06%
Category
BAMADvsUCBGA
Brookstone Active ETF · State Street SPDR UC Investments 90/10 Endowment Strategy Index ETF
Expense ratio
1.01% · 0.06%
Category
AOAAvsIRTRA
iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF · iShares LifePath Retirement ETF
Expense ratio
0.15% · 0.08%
Category
BAMADvsIRTRA
Brookstone Active ETF · iShares LifePath Retirement ETF
Expense ratio
1.01% · 0.08%
Category
AOAAvsINCEA
iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF · Franklin Income Equity Focus ETF
Expense ratio
0.15% · 0.29%
Category
BAMADvsINCEA
Brookstone Active ETF · Franklin Income Equity Focus ETF
Expense ratio
1.01% · 0.29%
Category

AOA vs BAMA

In short

Stated mandate

Why people hold it

Worth knowing

How AOA and BAMA differ

Level by level

Sector

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Concentration

Asset class

Holdings

Only in AOA

Only in BAMA

Weight gaps

Cost over time

Year by year

Distribution history

Fall from peak · 5 years

Risk facts

The fund built to limit losses had the category's worst return

How AOA and BAMA differ

Level by level

Sector

Country, concentration and asset class

Country by domicile

Concentration

Asset class

Holdings

Only in AOA

Only in BAMA

Weight gaps