ASLV vs. SCHV

Last updated Jun 3, 2026

ASLV (Allspring Special Large Value ETF) and SCHV (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Value ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. ASLV is actively managed, while SCHV is passively managed. Over the past year, ASLV returned 17.88% vs 29.14% for SCHV. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. ASLV charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SCHV.

Performance

ASLV vs. SCHV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Allspring Special Large Value ETF (ASLV) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Value ETF (SCHV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ASLV achieves a 5.24% return, which is significantly lower than SCHV's 15.29% return.

ASLV

• 1D: 0.35%
• 1M: -0.42%
• YTD: 5.24%
• 6M: 6.19%
• 1Y: 17.88%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

SCHV

• 1D: 1.25%
• 1M: 5.01%
• YTD: 15.29%
• 6M: 16.89%
• 1Y: 29.14%
• 3Y*: 18.82%
• 5Y*: 10.49%
• 10Y*: 11.49%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ASLV vs. SCHV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
ASLV Allspring Special Large Value ETF	5.24%	14.10%
SCHV Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Value ETF	15.29%	12.90%

Correlation

The correlation between ASLV and SCHV is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.90
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 28, 2025	0.91

The correlation between ASLV and SCHV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

ASLV vs. SCHV — Risk / Return Rank

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

ASLV

ASLV Risk / Return Rank: 42
ASLV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
ASLV Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
ASLV Omega Ratio Rank: 40
ASLV Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
ASLV Martin Ratio Rank: 44

SCHV

SCHV Risk / Return Rank: 83
SCHV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
SCHV Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
SCHV Omega Ratio Rank: 81
SCHV Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
SCHV Martin Ratio Rank: 84

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.

ASLV vs. SCHV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Allspring Special Large Value ETF (ASLV) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Value ETF (SCHV). 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.

	ASLV	SCHV	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	1.52	2.75	-1.23
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	2.20	3.91	-1.71
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.49	-0.22
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.05	4.31	-2.26
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	7.24	17.47	-10.23
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

ASLV vs. SCHV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ASLV Sharpe Ratio is 1.52, which is lower than the SCHV Sharpe Ratio of 2.75. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ASLV and SCHV, 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

	ASLV	SCHV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.52	2.75	-1.23
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.73	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.68	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.11	0.72	+0.39

Drawdowns

ASLV vs. SCHV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ASLV drawdown since its inception was -10.98%, smaller than the maximum SCHV drawdown of -37.08%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ASLV and SCHV.

Drawdown Indicators

	ASLV	SCHV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-10.98%	-37.08%	+26.10%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.69%	-6.83%	-1.86%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-15.26%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.78%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-37.08%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.33%	0.00%	-1.33%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.75%	-3.83%	+2.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.46%	1.69%	+0.77%

Volatility

ASLV vs. SCHV - Volatility Comparison

Allspring Special Large Value ETF (ASLV) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Value ETF (SCHV) have volatilities of 3.32% and 3.18%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	ASLV	SCHV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.32%	3.18%	+0.14%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.26%	8.17%	+1.09%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.82%	10.64%	+1.18%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.28%	14.51%	+0.77%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	15.28%	16.94%	-1.66%

ASLV vs. SCHV - Expense Ratio Comparison

ASLV has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHV's 0.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

ASLV vs. SCHV - Dividend Comparison

ASLV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.83%, less than SCHV's 1.76% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
ASLV Allspring Special Large Value ETF	0.83%	0.87%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SCHV Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Value ETF	1.76%	2.02%	2.25%	2.42%	2.37%	1.93%	3.03%	3.02%	3.05%	2.37%	2.65%	2.69%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both ASLV and SCHV in my portfolio?

ASLV and SCHV have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, ASLV or SCHV?

ASLV has higher volatility (3.32%) compared to SCHV (3.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ASLV dropped -10.98% vs SCHV's -37.08%.

Which ETF is better, ASLV or SCHV?

On 1-year performance, SCHV leads with 29.14% vs 17.88% for ASLV. On fees, SCHV is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, SCHV has been the lower-risk option at 3.18%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, ASLV or SCHV?

Over the 1-year period, SCHV has performed better with a 29.14% return vs 17.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, ASLV or SCHV?

SCHV is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for ASLV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, ASLV or SCHV?

SCHV has the higher dividend yield at 1.76%, compared with 0.83% for ASLV.

What is the main difference between ASLV and SCHV?

They also come from different issuers: Allspring and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for ASLV and 0.04% for SCHV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SCHV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.75 vs 1.52), 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.