CZAR vs. SCHG
Compare and contrast key facts about Themes Natural Monopoly ETF (CZAR) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG).
CZAR and SCHG are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. CZAR is a passively managed fund by Themes that tracks the performance of the Solactive Natural Monopoly Index - Benchmark TR Gross. It was launched on Dec 12, 2023. 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 CZAR 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: CZAR or SCHG.
Correlation
The correlation between CZAR and SCHG is 0.51, 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
CZAR vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison
Key characteristics
CZAR:
0.90
SCHG:
1.52
CZAR:
1.37
SCHG:
2.04
CZAR:
1.17
SCHG:
1.28
CZAR:
2.01
SCHG:
2.22
CZAR:
5.16
SCHG:
8.37
CZAR:
2.64%
SCHG:
3.28%
CZAR:
15.18%
SCHG:
18.10%
CZAR:
-6.77%
SCHG:
-34.59%
CZAR:
-1.57%
SCHG:
-3.75%
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, CZAR achieves a 5.29% return, which is significantly higher than SCHG's 0.50% return.
CZAR
5.29%
2.38%
5.31%
11.63%
N/A
N/A
SCHG
0.50%
-3.01%
9.81%
23.72%
18.13%
16.12%
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
CZAR vs. SCHG - Expense Ratio Comparison
CZAR has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHG's 0.04% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
CZAR vs. SCHG — Risk-Adjusted Performance Rank
CZAR
SCHG
CZAR vs. SCHG - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Themes Natural Monopoly ETF (CZAR) 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
CZAR vs. SCHG - Dividend Comparison
CZAR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.90%, more than SCHG's 0.39% yield.
| TTM | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CZAR Themes Natural Monopoly ETF | 0.90% | 0.94% | 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 | 0.39% | 0.40% | 0.46% | 0.55% | 0.42% | 0.52% | 0.82% | 1.27% | 1.01% | 1.04% | 1.22% | 1.09% |
Drawdowns
CZAR vs. SCHG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum CZAR drawdown since its inception was -6.77%, smaller than the maximum SCHG drawdown of -34.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CZAR and SCHG. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
CZAR vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Themes Natural Monopoly ETF (CZAR) is 3.20%, while Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) has a volatility of 5.41%. This indicates that CZAR 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.