FBTC vs. SCHA

Last updated Jul 21, 2026

FBTC (Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund) and SCHA (Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FBTC is a Cryptocurrency fund tracking the Fidelity Bitcoin Reference Rate, while SCHA is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Small-Cap Total Stock Market Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FBTC returned -44.68% vs 31.42% for SCHA. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FBTC charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SCHA.

Performance

FBTC vs. SCHA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund (FBTC) and Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF (SCHA). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FBTC achieves a -25.63% return, which is significantly lower than SCHA's 19.43% return.

FBTC

• 1D: 1.56%
• 1M: 3.51%
• 6M: -31.89%
• YTD: -25.63%
• 1Y: -44.68%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 12.64%

SCHA

• 1D: -0.53%
• 1M: -3.47%
• 6M: 11.37%
• YTD: 19.43%
• 1Y: 31.42%
• 3Y*: 15.94%
• 5Y*: 7.49%
• 10Y*: 10.66%
• ALL TIME*: 12.45%

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

FBTC vs. SCHA - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
FBTC Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund	-25.63%	-6.56%	94.28%
SCHA Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF	19.43%	11.60%	14.01%

Correlation

The correlation between FBTC and SCHA is 0.44, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.44
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 11, 2024	0.44

Return for Risk

FBTC vs. SCHA — Risk / Return Rank

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

FBTC

FBTC Risk / Return Rank: 2
FBTC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2
FBTC Sortino Ratio Rank: 2
FBTC Omega Ratio Rank: 2
FBTC Calmar Ratio Rank: 2
FBTC Martin Ratio Rank: 2

SCHA

SCHA Risk / Return Rank: 73
SCHA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 69
SCHA Sortino Ratio Rank: 71
SCHA Omega Ratio Rank: 63
SCHA Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
SCHA Martin Ratio Rank: 81

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.

FBTC vs. SCHA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund (FBTC) and Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF (SCHA). 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.

	FBTC	SCHA	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-1.01	1.67	-2.68
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-1.50	2.42	-3.92
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.83	1.28	-0.45
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.84	3.32	-4.16
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-1.34	11.38	-12.71

FBTC vs. SCHA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FBTC Sharpe Ratio is -1.01, which is lower than the SCHA Sharpe Ratio of 1.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FBTC and SCHA, 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

FBTC vs. SCHA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FBTC drawdown since its inception was -53.35%, which is greater than SCHA's maximum drawdown of -42.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FBTC and SCHA.

Drawdown Indicators

	FBTC	SCHA	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-53.35%	-42.41%	-10.94%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-53.35%	-9.50%	-43.85%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-27.29%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-30.79%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-42.41%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-48.20%	-6.26%	-41.94%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-17.73%	-7.54%	-10.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	33.39%	2.77%	+30.62%

Volatility

FBTC vs. SCHA - Volatility Comparison

Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund (FBTC) has a higher volatility of 10.58% compared to Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF (SCHA) at 5.84%. This indicates that FBTC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SCHA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FBTC	SCHA	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	10.58%	5.84%	+4.74%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	34.53%	14.41%	+20.12%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	44.30%	18.98%	+25.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	49.71%	22.02%	+27.69%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	49.71%	22.74%	+26.97%

FBTC vs. SCHA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FBTC has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHA'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%.

Dividends

FBTC vs. SCHA - Dividend Comparison

FBTC has not paid dividends to shareholders, while SCHA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.06%.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FBTC Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SCHA Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF	1.06%	1.26%	1.51%	1.42%	1.37%	1.19%	1.05%	1.39%	1.58%	1.24%	1.50%	1.48%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FBTC and SCHA in my portfolio?

FBTC and SCHA have a correlation of 0.44, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FBTC or SCHA?

FBTC has higher volatility (10.58%) compared to SCHA (5.84%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FBTC dropped -53.35% vs SCHA's -42.41%.

Which ETF is better, FBTC or SCHA?

On 1-year performance, SCHA leads with 31.42% vs -44.68% for FBTC. On fees, SCHA is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, SCHA has been the lower-risk option at 5.84%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FBTC or SCHA?

Over the 1-year period, SCHA has performed better with a 31.42% return vs -44.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FBTC or SCHA?

SCHA is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for FBTC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FBTC or SCHA?

SCHA has the higher dividend yield at 1.06%, compared with 0.00% for FBTC.

What is the main difference between FBTC and SCHA?

FBTC is categorized as Cryptocurrency, while SCHA is Small Cap Blend Equities. FBTC tracks Fidelity Bitcoin Reference Rate, while SCHA tracks Dow Jones U.S. Small-Cap Total Stock Market Index. They also come from different issuers: Fidelity and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for FBTC and 0.04% for SCHA.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SCHA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.67 vs -1.01), 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.