BLST vs. SCHO
BLST (Bluemonte Short Term Bond ETF) and SCHO (Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - BLST is a Short-Term Bond fund managed by Bluemonte, while SCHO is a Government Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg U.S. Treasury 1-3 Year Index. A 0.77 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. BLST charges 0.23%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for SCHO.
Performance
BLST vs. SCHO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BLST achieves a 0.25% return, which is significantly lower than SCHO's 0.42% return.
BLST
- 1D
- -0.10%
- 1M
- 0.11%
- YTD
- 0.25%
- 6M
- 0.38%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SCHO
- 1D
- -0.04%
- 1M
- 0.06%
- YTD
- 0.42%
- 6M
- 0.78%
- 1Y
- 3.39%
- 3Y*
- 4.15%
- 5Y*
- 1.80%
- 10Y*
- 1.71%
BLST vs. SCHO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BLST Bluemonte Short Term Bond ETF | 0.25% | 2.88% |
SCHO Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF | 0.42% | 2.58% |
Correlation
The correlation between BLST and SCHO is 0.77, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 24, 2025 | 0.77 |
BLST vs. SCHO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
BLST
SCHO
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
-
Communication Services
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
-
Financial Services
BLST
SCHO
Basic Materials
BLST
-
SCHO
-
Communication Services
BLST
-
SCHO
Consumer Cyclical
BLST
-
SCHO
-
Consumer Defensive
BLST
-
SCHO
-
Energy
BLST
-
SCHO
-
Healthcare
BLST
-
SCHO
-
Industrials
BLST
-
SCHO
-
Real Estate
BLST
-
SCHO
-
Technology
BLST
-
SCHO
Utilities
BLST
-
SCHO
-
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
BLST vs. SCHO — Risk / Return Rank
BLST
SCHO
BLST vs. SCHO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bluemonte Short Term Bond ETF (BLST) and Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF (SCHO). 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.
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| BLST | SCHO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | — | 2.48 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | — | 0.91 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 1.10 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.51 | 0.99 | +0.51 |
Drawdowns
BLST vs. SCHO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BLST drawdown since its inception was -1.69%, smaller than the maximum SCHO drawdown of -5.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BLST and SCHO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BLST | SCHO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -1.69% | -5.69% | +4.00% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -0.86% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -0.98% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -5.69% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -5.69% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.92% | -0.27% | -0.65% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.35% | -0.61% | +0.26% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 0.20% | — |
Volatility
BLST vs. SCHO - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BLST | SCHO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 0.41% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 0.90% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.21% | 1.37% | +0.84% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.21% | 1.98% | +0.23% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 2.21% | 1.56% | +0.65% |
BLST vs. SCHO - Expense Ratio Comparison
BLST has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHO's 0.03% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
BLST vs. SCHO - Dividend Comparison
BLST's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.38%, less than SCHO's 3.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BLST Bluemonte Short Term Bond ETF | 3.38% | 2.11% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SCHO Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF | 3.91% | 4.06% | 4.29% | 3.76% | 1.34% | 0.41% | 1.27% | 2.27% | 1.60% | 1.12% | 0.82% | 0.68% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BLST and SCHO have a correlation of 0.77, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, SCHO is cheaper at 0.03% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
SCHO is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.23% for BLST.
SCHO has the higher dividend yield at 3.91%, compared with 3.38% for BLST.
BLST is categorized as Short-Term Bond, while SCHO is Government Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Bluemonte and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for BLST and 0.03% for SCHO.
Find the right allocation for BLST and SCHO
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer