PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FCG vs. SCHO
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FCG vs. SCHO - Performance Comparison

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

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FCG achieves a 27.71% return, which is significantly higher than SCHO's 0.42% return. Over the past 10 years, FCG has outperformed SCHO with an annualized return of 4.65%, while SCHO has yielded a comparatively lower 1.71% annualized return.


FCG

1D
1.02%
1M
-6.03%
YTD
27.71%
6M
20.12%
1Y
32.99%
3Y*
12.75%
5Y*
16.52%
10Y*
4.65%

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

FCG vs. SCHO - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FCG
First Trust Natural Gas ETF
27.71%-2.28%4.16%2.55%47.24%98.49%-23.20%-15.76%-34.81%-11.38%
SCHO
Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF
0.42%5.49%3.65%4.31%-3.87%-0.64%3.11%3.47%1.37%0.33%

Correlation

The correlation between FCG and SCHO is -0.28, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

-0.28

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

-0.14

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

-0.11

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

-0.16

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 6, 2010

-0.16

The correlation between FCG and SCHO shifts across timeframes, from -0.28 (1 year) to -0.11 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FCG vs. SCHO - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FCG
SCHO

Energy

99.2%

-

Technology

0.8%
1.1%

Basic Materials

-

-

Communication Services

-

1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

-

-

Consumer Defensive

-

-

Financial Services

-

0.2%

Healthcare

-

-

Industrials

-

-

Real Estate

-

-

Utilities

-

-

Energy

FCG
99.2%
SCHO

-

Technology

FCG
0.8%
SCHO
1.1%

Basic Materials

FCG

-

SCHO

-

Communication Services

FCG

-

SCHO
1.1%

Consumer Cyclical

FCG

-

SCHO

-

Consumer Defensive

FCG

-

SCHO

-

Financial Services

FCG

-

SCHO
0.2%

Healthcare

FCG

-

SCHO

-

Industrials

FCG

-

SCHO

-

Real Estate

FCG

-

SCHO

-

Utilities

FCG

-

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

FCG vs. SCHO — Risk / Return Rank

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

FCG
FCG Risk / Return Rank: 3636
Overall Rank
FCG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3434
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FCG Sortino Ratio Rank: 3131
Sortino Ratio Rank
FCG Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
FCG Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
FCG Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
Martin Ratio Rank

SCHO
SCHO Risk / Return Rank: 8181
Overall Rank
SCHO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7474
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SCHO Sortino Ratio Rank: 8888
Sortino Ratio Rank
SCHO Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
SCHO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7777
Calmar Ratio Rank
SCHO Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FCG vs. SCHO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for First Trust Natural Gas ETF (FCG) 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.


FCGSCHODifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.24

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.37

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.21

1.50

-0.29

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.54

3.96

-1.43

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

5.56

17.03

-11.47

FCG vs. SCHO - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FCG Sharpe Ratio is 1.24, which is lower than the SCHO Sharpe Ratio of 2.48. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FCG 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.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FCGSCHODifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.24

2.48

-1.24

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.50

0.91

-0.42

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.12

1.10

-0.98

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

-0.11

0.99

-1.10

Drawdowns

FCG vs. SCHO - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FCG drawdown since its inception was -97.20%, which is greater than SCHO's maximum drawdown of -5.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FCG and SCHO.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FCGSCHODifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-97.20%

-5.69%

-91.51%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-13.07%

-0.86%

-12.21%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-29.44%

-0.98%

-28.46%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-33.33%

-5.69%

-27.64%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-85.04%

-5.69%

-79.35%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-74.25%

-0.27%

-73.98%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-65.38%

-0.61%

-64.77%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.95%

0.20%

+5.75%

Volatility

FCG vs. SCHO - Volatility Comparison

First Trust Natural Gas ETF (FCG) has a higher volatility of 9.60% compared to Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF (SCHO) at 0.41%. This indicates that FCG'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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FCGSCHODifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

9.60%

0.41%

+9.19%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

20.15%

0.90%

+19.25%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

26.75%

1.37%

+25.38%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

33.46%

1.98%

+31.48%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

38.30%

1.56%

+36.74%

FCG vs. SCHO - Expense Ratio Comparison

FCG has a 0.60% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHO's 0.03% expense ratio.


Dividends

FCG vs. SCHO - Dividend Comparison

FCG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.15%, less than SCHO's 3.91% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FCG
First Trust Natural Gas ETF
2.15%2.86%2.76%3.25%3.04%1.73%3.82%2.87%1.46%1.56%1.70%4.79%
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


FCG and SCHO have a correlation of -0.28, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FCG has higher volatility (9.60%) compared to SCHO (0.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FCG dropped -97.20% vs SCHO's -5.69%.

On 10-year performance, FCG leads with 4.65% vs 1.71% for SCHO. On fees, SCHO is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, SCHO has been the lower-risk option at 0.41%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FCG has performed better with a 4.65% return vs 1.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SCHO is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for FCG.

SCHO has the higher dividend yield at 3.91%, compared with 2.15% for FCG.

FCG is categorized as Energy Equities, while SCHO is Government Bonds. FCG tracks ISE-Revere Natural Gas Index, while SCHO tracks Bloomberg U.S. Treasury 1-3 Year Index. They also come from different issuers: First Trust and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.60% for FCG and 0.03% for SCHO.

SCHO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.48 vs 1.24), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for FCG 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