CEMS.DE vs. SCHG
Compare and contrast key facts about iShares Edge MSCI Europe Value Factor UCITS ETF (CEMS.DE) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG).
CEMS.DE and SCHG are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CEMS.DE is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the MSCI Europe Enhanced Value. It was launched on Jan 16, 2015. SCHG is a passively managed fund by Charles Schwab that tracks the performance of the Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Total Return Index. It was launched on Dec 11, 2009. Both CEMS.DE and SCHG are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: CEMS.DE or SCHG.
Key characteristics
| CEMS.DE | SCHG | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 7.97% | 34.32% |
| 1Y Return | 14.59% | 42.00% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 5.93% | 11.21% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 6.89% | 20.69% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 1.20 | 2.64 |
| Sortino Ratio | 1.63 | 3.39 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.21 | 1.48 |
| Calmar Ratio | 1.54 | 3.62 |
| Martin Ratio | 5.55 | 14.42 |
| Ulcer Index | 2.37% | 3.10% |
| Daily Std Dev | 11.03% | 16.93% |
| Max Drawdown | -40.20% | -34.59% |
| Current Drawdown | -4.35% | -0.18% |
Correlation
The correlation between CEMS.DE and SCHG is 0.41, which is considered to be moderate. This suggests that the two assets have some degree of positive relationship in their price movements. Moderate correlation can be acceptable for portfolio diversification, offering a balance between risk and potential returns.
Performance
CEMS.DE vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, CEMS.DE achieves a 7.97% return, which is significantly lower than SCHG's 34.32% return. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
CEMS.DE vs. SCHG - Expense Ratio Comparison
CEMS.DE has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHG's 0.04% 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%.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
CEMS.DE vs. SCHG - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Edge MSCI Europe Value Factor UCITS ETF (CEMS.DE) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). 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.
Dividends
CEMS.DE vs. SCHG - Dividend Comparison
CEMS.DE has not paid dividends to shareholders, while SCHG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.40%.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CEMS.DE iShares Edge MSCI Europe Value Factor UCITS ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF | 0.40% | 0.46% | 0.55% | 0.42% | 0.52% | 0.82% | 1.27% | 1.01% | 1.04% | 1.22% | 1.09% | 1.07% |
Drawdowns
CEMS.DE vs. SCHG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CEMS.DE drawdown since its inception was -40.20%, which is greater than SCHG's maximum drawdown of -34.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CEMS.DE and SCHG. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
CEMS.DE vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares Edge MSCI Europe Value Factor UCITS ETF (CEMS.DE) is 4.50%, while Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) has a volatility of 5.15%. This indicates that CEMS.DE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SCHG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.