IMCB vs. SCHG

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

IMCB (iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF) and SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - IMCB is a Mid Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the IMCB-US - Morningstar U.S. Mid Cap Index, while SCHG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, IMCB returned 11.18%/yr vs 18.53%/yr for SCHG. Their correlation of 0.82 suggests significant overlap in exposure. Both charge a 0.04% expense ratio.

Performance

IMCB vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IMCB achieves a 12.99% return, which is significantly higher than SCHG's 3.75% return. Over the past 10 years, IMCB has underperformed SCHG with an annualized return of 11.18%, while SCHG has yielded a comparatively higher 18.53% annualized return.

IMCB

• 1D: 0.09%
• 1M: 2.56%
• YTD: 12.99%
• 6M: 13.23%
• 1Y: 20.86%
• 3Y*: 16.89%
• 5Y*: 8.49%
• 10Y*: 11.18%

SCHG

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: -0.94%
• YTD: 3.75%
• 6M: 2.93%
• 1Y: 20.82%
• 3Y*: 24.03%
• 5Y*: 14.90%
• 10Y*: 18.53%

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

IMCB vs. SCHG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
IMCB iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF	12.99%	10.25%	15.10%	16.37%	-16.09%	22.81%	13.35%	31.49%	-11.53%	19.70%
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF	3.75%	17.50%	34.95%	50.10%	-31.80%	28.11%	39.14%	36.02%	-1.36%	28.05%

Correlation

The correlation between IMCB and SCHG is 0.61, 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	0.61
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.65
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.75
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 14, 2009	0.82

Over the past year, the correlation between IMCB and SCHG has dropped to 0.61 - well below their long-term average of 0.82, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

IMCB vs. SCHG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	IMCB	SCHG
Technology	21.8%	46.3%
Industrials	19.1%	5.8%
Financial Services	11.7%	6.7%
Consumer Cyclical	9.0%	12.7%
Healthcare	7.9%	7.7%
Energy	7.0%	0.8%
Utilities	6.1%	0.4%
Basic Materials	5.5%	1.4%
Consumer Defensive	5.2%	1.7%
Real Estate	4.2%	0.5%
Communication Services	2.3%	16.0%

Return for Risk

IMCB vs. SCHG — Risk / Return Rank

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

IMCB

IMCB Risk / Return Rank: 55
IMCB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
IMCB Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
IMCB Omega Ratio Rank: 50
IMCB Calmar Ratio Rank: 57
IMCB Martin Ratio Rank: 63

SCHG

SCHG Risk / Return Rank: 36
SCHG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
SCHG Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
SCHG Omega Ratio Rank: 40
SCHG Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
SCHG Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

IMCB vs. SCHG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB) 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.

	IMCB	SCHG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.62	1.33	+0.29
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.30	1.82	+0.47
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	1.24	+0.05
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.60	1.27	+1.33
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.27	4.25	+6.02
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

IMCB vs. SCHG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMCB Sharpe Ratio is 1.62, which is comparable to the SCHG Sharpe Ratio of 1.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMCB and SCHG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	IMCB	SCHG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.62	1.33	+0.29
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.48	0.67	-0.19
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.57	0.86	-0.29
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.50	0.83	-0.33

Drawdowns

IMCB vs. SCHG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMCB drawdown since its inception was -58.80%, which is greater than SCHG's maximum drawdown of -34.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMCB and SCHG.

Drawdown Indicators

	IMCB	SCHG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-58.80%	-34.59%	-24.21%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-8.05%	-16.41%	+8.36%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-19.80%	-23.39%	+3.59%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.15%	-34.59%	+9.44%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-40.99%	-34.59%	-6.40%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.19%	-4.25%	+2.06%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.73%	-5.20%	-2.53%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.04%	4.91%	-2.87%

Volatility

IMCB vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB) is 3.73%, while Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) has a volatility of 4.52%. This indicates that IMCB 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.

Volatility by Period

	IMCB	SCHG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.73%	4.52%	-0.79%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.87%	12.02%	-2.15%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.96%	15.77%	-2.81%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.60%	22.31%	-4.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.67%	21.58%	-1.91%

IMCB vs. SCHG - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both IMCB and SCHG have an expense ratio of 0.04%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

IMCB vs. SCHG - Dividend Comparison

IMCB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.23%, more than SCHG's 0.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
IMCB iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF	1.23%	1.42%	1.43%	1.55%	1.70%	1.08%	1.12%	1.32%	1.80%	1.31%	1.79%	1.47%
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF	0.37%	0.36%	0.39%	0.46%	0.55%	0.42%	0.52%	0.82%	1.27%	1.01%	1.04%	1.22%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both IMCB and SCHG in my portfolio?

IMCB and SCHG have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, IMCB or SCHG?

SCHG has higher volatility (4.52%) compared to IMCB (3.73%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMCB dropped -58.80% vs SCHG's -34.59%.

Which ETF is better, IMCB or SCHG?

On 10-year performance, SCHG leads with 18.53% vs 11.18% for IMCB. Both ETFs have the same 0.04% expense ratio. On volatility, IMCB has been the lower-risk option at 3.73%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, IMCB or SCHG?

Over the 10-year period, SCHG has performed better with a 18.53% return vs 11.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, IMCB or SCHG?

IMCB and SCHG have the same expense ratio: 0.04% per year.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, IMCB or SCHG?

IMCB has the higher dividend yield at 1.23%, compared with 0.37% for SCHG.

What is the main difference between IMCB and SCHG?

IMCB is categorized as Mid Cap Blend Equities, while SCHG is Large Cap Growth Equities. IMCB tracks IMCB-US - Morningstar U.S. Mid Cap Index, while SCHG tracks Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Charles Schwab.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IMCB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.62 vs 1.33), 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.