FLTR vs. SCHO
FLTR (VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF) and SCHO (Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FLTR is a Corporate Bonds fund tracking the MVIS US Investment Grade Floating Rate Index, while SCHO is a Government Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg U.S. Treasury 1-3 Year Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FLTR returned 3.49%/yr vs 1.68%/yr for SCHO. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. FLTR charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for SCHO.
Performance
FLTR vs. SCHO - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FLTR achieves a 2.19% return, which is significantly higher than SCHO's 0.42% return. Over the past 10 years, FLTR has outperformed SCHO with an annualized return of 3.49%, while SCHO has yielded a comparatively lower 1.68% annualized return.
FLTR
- 1D
- 0.08%
- 1M
- 0.38%
- YTD
- 2.19%
- 6M
- 2.36%
- 1Y
- 5.25%
- 3Y*
- 6.16%
- 5Y*
- 4.55%
- 10Y*
- 3.49%
SCHO
- 1D
- 0.00%
- 1M
- 0.14%
- YTD
- 0.42%
- 6M
- 0.62%
- 1Y
- 3.01%
- 3Y*
- 4.20%
- 5Y*
- 1.84%
- 10Y*
- 1.68%
FLTR vs. SCHO - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLTR VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF | 2.19% | 5.22% | 7.38% | 7.41% | 0.74% | 0.55% | 1.44% | 5.70% | 0.30% | 2.80% |
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 FLTR and SCHO is 0.04, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.04 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | -0.01 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.00 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | -0.01 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 26, 2011 | -0.01 |
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
FLTR vs. SCHO — Risk / Return Rank
FLTR
SCHO
FLTR vs. SCHO - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF (FLTR) 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.
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.
| FLTR | SCHO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +4.39 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +8.76 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 3.03 | 1.43 | +1.60 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 16.82 | 3.51 | +13.31 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 98.58 | 14.59 | +83.99 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FLTR vs. SCHO - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FLTR drawdown since its inception was -17.84%, which is greater than SCHO's maximum drawdown of -5.69%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FLTR and SCHO.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FLTR | SCHO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.84% | -5.69% | -12.15% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.31% | -0.86% | +0.55% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -1.93% | -0.98% | -0.95% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -3.06% | -5.69% | +2.63% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -17.84% | -5.69% | -12.15% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.00% | -0.27% | +0.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.67% | -0.61% | -0.06% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.05% | 0.21% | -0.16% |
Volatility
FLTR vs. SCHO - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF (FLTR) is 0.29%, while Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF (SCHO) has a volatility of 0.49%. This indicates that FLTR experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SCHO based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FLTR | SCHO | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.29% | 0.49% | -0.20% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.66% | 0.98% | -0.32% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.80% | 1.40% | -0.60% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.13% | 1.99% | +0.14% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.00% | 1.56% | +3.44% |
FLTR vs. SCHO - Expense Ratio Comparison
FLTR has a 0.14% 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
FLTR vs. SCHO - Dividend Comparison
FLTR's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.72%, more than SCHO's 3.91% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FLTR VanEck IG Floating Rate ETF | 4.72% | 4.97% | 5.93% | 6.07% | 2.29% | 0.63% | 1.49% | 3.05% | 2.67% | 1.69% | 1.16% | 0.71% |
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
FLTR and SCHO have a correlation of 0.04, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SCHO has higher volatility (0.49%) compared to FLTR (0.29%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FLTR dropped -17.84% vs SCHO's -5.69%.
On 10-year performance, FLTR leads with 3.49% vs 1.68% for SCHO. On fees, SCHO is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, FLTR has been the lower-risk option at 0.29%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, FLTR has performed better with a 3.49% return vs 1.68%. 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 0.14% for FLTR.
FLTR has the higher dividend yield at 4.72%, compared with 3.91% for SCHO.
FLTR is categorized as Corporate Bonds, while SCHO is Government Bonds. FLTR tracks MVIS US Investment Grade Floating Rate Index, while SCHO tracks Bloomberg U.S. Treasury 1-3 Year Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for FLTR and 0.03% for SCHO.
FLTR currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (6.56 vs 2.16), 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 FLTR 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