FLGV vs. SCHO
FLGV (Franklin Liberty U.S. Treasury Bond ETF) and SCHO (Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF) are both Government Bonds funds. FLGV is actively managed, while SCHO is passively managed. Over the past 5 years, FLGV returned -0.17%/yr vs 1.80%/yr for SCHO. A 0.73 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FLGV charges 0.09%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for SCHO.
Performance
FLGV vs. SCHO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FLGV achieves a 0.06% return, which is significantly lower than SCHO's 0.42% return.
FLGV
- 1D
- -0.17%
- 1M
- 0.12%
- YTD
- 0.06%
- 6M
- -0.23%
- 1Y
- 3.99%
- 3Y*
- 2.91%
- 5Y*
- -0.17%
- 10Y*
- —
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%
FLGV vs. SCHO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLGV Franklin Liberty U.S. Treasury Bond ETF | 0.06% | 6.22% | 0.62% | 4.18% | -11.53% | -2.39% | -0.27% |
SCHO Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF | 0.42% | 5.49% | 3.65% | 4.31% | -3.87% | -0.64% | 0.19% |
Correlation
The correlation between FLGV and SCHO is 0.75, 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 | 0.75 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.78 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.77 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 12, 2020 | 0.74 |
The correlation between FLGV and SCHO has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.73 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.
FLGV vs. SCHO - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FLGV
SCHO
Communication Services
Basic Materials
-
-
Consumer Cyclical
-
-
Consumer Defensive
-
-
Energy
-
-
Financial Services
-
Healthcare
-
-
Industrials
-
-
Real Estate
-
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
-
Communication Services
FLGV
SCHO
Basic Materials
FLGV
-
SCHO
-
Consumer Cyclical
FLGV
-
SCHO
-
Consumer Defensive
FLGV
-
SCHO
-
Energy
FLGV
-
SCHO
-
Financial Services
FLGV
-
SCHO
Healthcare
FLGV
-
SCHO
-
Industrials
FLGV
-
SCHO
-
Real Estate
FLGV
-
SCHO
-
Technology
FLGV
-
SCHO
Utilities
FLGV
-
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
FLGV vs. SCHO — Risk / Return Rank
FLGV
SCHO
FLGV vs. SCHO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Franklin Liberty U.S. Treasury Bond ETF (FLGV) 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.
| FLGV | SCHO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.41 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -2.44 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.19 | 1.50 | -0.31 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.42 | 3.96 | -2.54 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 4.20 | 17.03 | -12.83 |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| FLGV | SCHO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.07 | 2.48 | -1.41 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.03 | 0.91 | -0.95 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 1.10 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.13 | 0.99 | -1.13 |
Drawdowns
FLGV vs. SCHO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FLGV drawdown since its inception was -17.63%, which is greater than SCHO's maximum drawdown of -5.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLGV and SCHO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FLGV | SCHO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.63% | -5.69% | -11.94% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -2.82% | -0.86% | -1.96% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -5.23% | -0.98% | -4.25% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -15.26% | -5.69% | -9.57% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -5.69% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -5.54% | -0.27% | -5.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -8.73% | -0.61% | -8.12% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.95% | 0.20% | +0.75% |
Volatility
FLGV vs. SCHO - Volatility Comparison
Franklin Liberty U.S. Treasury Bond ETF (FLGV) has a higher volatility of 1.20% compared to Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF (SCHO) at 0.41%. This indicates that FLGV'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
| FLGV | SCHO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.20% | 0.41% | +0.79% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 2.49% | 0.90% | +1.59% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.73% | 1.37% | +2.36% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 5.43% | 1.98% | +3.45% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.15% | 1.56% | +3.59% |
FLGV vs. SCHO - Expense Ratio Comparison
FLGV has a 0.09% 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
FLGV vs. SCHO - Dividend Comparison
FLGV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.15%, more than SCHO's 3.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLGV Franklin Liberty U.S. Treasury Bond ETF | 4.15% | 4.07% | 4.13% | 3.46% | 2.21% | 1.92% | 0.97% | 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
FLGV and SCHO have a correlation of 0.75, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FLGV has higher volatility (1.20%) compared to SCHO (0.41%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLGV dropped -17.63% vs SCHO's -5.69%.
On 5-year performance, SCHO leads with 1.80% vs -0.17% for FLGV. 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 5-year period, SCHO has performed better with a 1.80% return vs -0.17%. 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 0.09% for FLGV.
FLGV has the higher dividend yield at 4.15%, compared with 3.91% for SCHO.
They also come from different issuers: Franklin Templeton and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.09% for FLGV and 0.03% for SCHO.
SCHO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.48 vs 1.07), 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.
Find the right allocation for FLGV 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