IRTR ranks 3rd and BAMO 29th of 36 funds in the Multi-Asset Allocation Category.
BAMO vs IRTR
IRTR −0.97pt a year
1.05%0.08%
IRTR 2.7×the volume
4.61K12.6K
Same figure. Both funds show the same value, so neither comes out ahead.
+11.9%+11.9%
BAMO vs IRTR Performance
+7.5%+5.2%
- BAMO 1.05%
- IRTR 0.08%, better
- BAMO $44M
- IRTR $59M
- BAMO +7.5%, better
- IRTR +5.2%
- BAMO 1.39%
- IRTR 3.21%, better
- BAMO 6
- IRTR 29136
- BAMO 4.61K sh
- IRTR 12.6K sh, better
- BAMO $34.15
- IRTR $31.23
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | BAMO | IRTR |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | F11 | A97Higher |
| Mission | C40 | A100Higher |
| Risk | B58 | A81Higher |
| Tradability | B55 | B64Higher |
| Holdings | D34 | A79Higher |
| Durability | C52 | B56Higher |
Rank among Multi-Asset Allocation funds
Same Category. BAMO and IRTR are both graded against the same 36 Multi-Asset Allocation funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
BAMOD
IRTRA
In short
BAMO A go-anywhere tactical blend: the adviser builds the whole thing out of just 5 to 10 outside ETFs and can swing from all-in on stocks to all the way out into Treasuries and cash as its read on markets changes.
IRTR A whole retirement portfolio in one ticker: global stock and bond ETFs blended at the conservative end, for 0.08% a year. That is index-fund pricing on a job most allocation funds charge roughly ten times more to do.
Stated mandate
BAMO Seeks total return. It actively allocates through unaffiliated ETFs across foreign and domestic stocks of any capitalization, bonds, and cash based on the adviser’s relative outlook.
IRTR The fund seeks conservative exposure through a broad portfolio of stock and bond ETFs spanning global asset classes.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
BAMO vs IRTR 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.
BAMO vs IRTR Cost
Overpaying BAMO vs IRTR
$17,806
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
BAMO 1.05%
$19,495
IRTR 0.08%
$1,689
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | BAMO | IRTR | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $1,847 | $147 | $1,700 |
| 20 | $6,927 | $575 | $6,352 |
| 30 | $19,495 | $1,689 | $17,806 |
- 1.05%BAMO
- 0.08%IRTR, cheaper
- Middle half of Multi-Asset Allocation funds
- Median 0.61%
IRTR 2nd cheapest of 36 funds
BAMO 32nd cheapest of 36 funds
BAMO vs IRTR Dividends
- BAMO 1.39%
- IRTR 3.21%, better
- BAMO $0.47
- IRTR $1.00
- BAMO $0.11
- IRTR $0.07
- BAMO Aug 28, 2026
- IRTR Nov 3, 2026
- BAMO Sep 4, 2026
- IRTR Nov 6, 2026
- BAMO Quarterly
- IRTR Monthly
Distribution history
BAMO vs IRTR Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- BAMO 7.4%IRTR 7.3%, better
- Return per unit of risk
- BAMO 1.13IRTR 1.14, better
- Worst fall
- BAMO −12.7%IRTR −6.3%
- Market sensitivity
- BAMO 0.58IRTR 0.46
Popular comparisons
- 1.05% · 0.06%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.08% · 0.06%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 1.05% · 0.15%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.08% · 0.15%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 1.05% · 0.29%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.08% · 0.29%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.