BLST vs. SCHO

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

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. Over the past year, BLST returned 3.24% vs 3.01% for SCHO. 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

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bluemonte Short Term Bond ETF (BLST) and Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF (SCHO). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BLST achieves a 0.35% return, which is significantly lower than SCHO's 0.42% return.

BLST

• 1D: 0.08%
• 1M: 0.35%
• YTD: 0.35%
• 6M: 0.52%
• 1Y: 3.24%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

SCHO

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.14%
• YTD: 0.42%
• 6M: 0.62%
• 1Y: 3.01%
• 3Y*: 4.20%
• 5Y*: 1.84%
• 10Y*: 1.68%

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

BLST vs. SCHO - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
BLST Bluemonte Short Term Bond ETF	0.35%	2.68%
SCHO Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF	0.42%	2.66%

Correlation

The correlation between BLST and SCHO is 0.78, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.78
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2025	0.77

The correlation between BLST and SCHO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.77 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

BLST vs. SCHO — Risk / Return Rank

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

BLST

BLST Risk / Return Rank: 44
BLST Sharpe Ratio Rank: 45
BLST Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
BLST Omega Ratio Rank: 43
BLST Calmar Ratio Rank: 42
BLST Martin Ratio Rank: 41

SCHO

SCHO Risk / Return Rank: 76
SCHO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 70
SCHO Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
SCHO Omega Ratio Rank: 77
SCHO Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
SCHO Martin Ratio Rank: 78

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.

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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	BLST	SCHO	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.45	2.16	-0.71
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.19	3.42	-1.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.26	1.43	-0.17
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.92	3.51	-1.59
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.89	14.59	-8.71

BLST vs. SCHO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BLST Sharpe Ratio is 1.45, which is lower than the SCHO Sharpe Ratio of 2.16. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BLST and SCHO, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

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.

Drawdown Indicators

	BLST	SCHO	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-1.69%	-5.69%	+4.00%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-1.69%	-0.86%	-0.83%
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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.82%	-0.27%	-0.55%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.37%	-0.61%	+0.24%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.55%	0.21%	+0.34%

Volatility

BLST vs. SCHO - Volatility Comparison

Bluemonte Short Term Bond ETF (BLST) has a higher volatility of 0.73% compared to Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF (SCHO) at 0.49%. This indicates that BLST's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SCHO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BLST	SCHO	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.73%	0.49%	+0.24%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	1.69%	0.98%	+0.71%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.25%	1.40%	+0.85%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	2.25%	1.99%	+0.26%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	2.25%	1.56%	+0.69%

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

Can I hold both BLST and SCHO in my portfolio?

BLST and SCHO have a correlation of 0.78, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BLST or SCHO?

BLST has higher volatility (0.73%) compared to SCHO (0.49%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BLST dropped -1.69% vs SCHO's -5.69%.

Which ETF is better, BLST or SCHO?

On 1-year performance, BLST leads with 3.24% vs 3.01% for SCHO. On fees, SCHO is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, SCHO has been the lower-risk option at 0.49%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BLST or SCHO?

Over the 1-year period, BLST has performed better with a 3.24% return vs 3.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BLST or SCHO?

SCHO is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.23% for BLST.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BLST or SCHO?

SCHO has the higher dividend yield at 3.91%, compared with 3.38% for BLST.

What is the main difference between BLST and SCHO?

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.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SCHO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.16 vs 1.45), 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.