PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
LRGF vs. SCHK
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

LRGF vs. SCHK - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF (LRGF) and Schwab 1000 Index ETF (SCHK). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, LRGF achieves a 7.84% return, which is significantly lower than SCHK's 8.54% return.


LRGF

1D
-1.26%
1M
-0.45%
YTD
7.84%
6M
6.74%
1Y
21.21%
3Y*
21.28%
5Y*
13.54%
10Y*
14.05%

SCHK

1D
-1.42%
1M
-0.95%
YTD
8.54%
6M
7.46%
1Y
23.67%
3Y*
20.74%
5Y*
12.31%
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

LRGF vs. SCHK - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
LRGF
iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF
7.84%16.48%26.59%25.85%-14.77%25.01%11.11%26.11%-9.66%5.05%
SCHK
Schwab 1000 Index ETF
8.54%17.23%24.48%26.63%-19.51%26.17%20.75%31.31%-5.09%5.24%

Correlation

The correlation between LRGF and SCHK is 0.99 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


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

0.99

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

0.99

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

0.98

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 11, 2017

0.97

The correlation between LRGF and SCHK has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.97 to 0.99 - a consistent structural relationship.

LRGF vs. SCHK - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
LRGF
SCHK

Technology

38.9%
38.0%

Financial Services

11.7%
11.2%

Consumer Cyclical

11.0%
9.8%

Healthcare

8.8%
8.4%

Communication Services

7.9%
10.1%

Industrials

7.8%
8.9%

Consumer Defensive

5.3%
4.3%

Energy

3.3%
3.2%

Utilities

2.1%
2.1%

Basic Materials

1.9%
1.9%

Real Estate

1.3%
2.0%

Technology

LRGF
38.9%
SCHK
38.0%

Financial Services

LRGF
11.7%
SCHK
11.2%

Consumer Cyclical

LRGF
11.0%
SCHK
9.8%

Healthcare

LRGF
8.8%
SCHK
8.4%

Communication Services

LRGF
7.9%
SCHK
10.1%

Industrials

LRGF
7.8%
SCHK
8.9%

Consumer Defensive

LRGF
5.3%
SCHK
4.3%

Energy

LRGF
3.3%
SCHK
3.2%

Utilities

LRGF
2.1%
SCHK
2.1%

Basic Materials

LRGF
1.9%
SCHK
1.9%

Real Estate

LRGF
1.3%
SCHK
2.0%

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

LRGF vs. SCHK — Risk / Return Rank

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

LRGF
LRGF Risk / Return Rank: 5252
Overall Rank
LRGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5252
Sharpe Ratio Rank
LRGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
LRGF Omega Ratio Rank: 5050
Omega Ratio Rank
LRGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 5151
Calmar Ratio Rank
LRGF Martin Ratio Rank: 5858
Martin Ratio Rank

SCHK
SCHK Risk / Return Rank: 5858
Overall Rank
SCHK Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SCHK Sortino Ratio Rank: 5555
Sortino Ratio Rank
SCHK Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
SCHK Calmar Ratio Rank: 5656
Calmar Ratio Rank
SCHK Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
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.

LRGF vs. SCHK - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF (LRGF) and Schwab 1000 Index ETF (SCHK). 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.


LRGFSCHKDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.17

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.20

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.30

1.33

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.39

2.65

-0.26

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.61

11.81

-2.21

LRGF vs. SCHK - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current LRGF Sharpe Ratio is 1.69, which is comparable to the SCHK Sharpe Ratio of 1.86. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of LRGF and SCHK, 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...

Drawdowns

LRGF vs. SCHK - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum LRGF drawdown since its inception was -36.03%, roughly equal to the maximum SCHK drawdown of -34.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LRGF and SCHK.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


LRGFSCHKDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-36.03%

-34.80%

-1.23%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.92%

-8.97%

+0.05%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-19.44%

-19.21%

-0.23%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-21.62%

-25.44%

+3.82%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-36.03%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.10%

-2.98%

-0.12%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-4.53%

-5.16%

+0.63%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.21%

2.01%

+0.20%

Volatility

LRGF vs. SCHK - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF (LRGF) and Schwab 1000 Index ETF (SCHK) have volatilities of 4.77% and 4.96%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


LRGFSCHKDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.77%

4.96%

-0.19%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.90%

10.10%

-0.20%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.63%

12.84%

-0.21%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.10%

17.34%

-0.24%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.33%

19.12%

-0.79%

LRGF vs. SCHK - Expense Ratio Comparison

LRGF has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHK'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

LRGF vs. SCHK - Dividend Comparison

LRGF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.10%, more than SCHK's 1.03% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
LRGF
iShares MSCI USA Multifactor ETF
1.10%1.16%1.23%1.49%1.78%1.05%1.35%1.76%3.27%1.68%1.56%0.83%
SCHK
Schwab 1000 Index ETF
1.03%1.09%1.20%1.38%1.57%1.17%1.58%1.82%1.80%0.31%0.00%0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.99, LRGF and SCHK move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

SCHK has higher volatility (4.96%) compared to LRGF (4.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, LRGF dropped -36.03% vs SCHK's -34.80%.

On 5-year performance, LRGF leads with 13.54% vs 12.31% for SCHK. On fees, SCHK is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, LRGF has been the lower-risk option at 4.77%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, LRGF has performed better with a 13.54% return vs 12.31%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SCHK is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.20% for LRGF.

LRGF has the higher dividend yield at 1.10%, compared with 1.03% for SCHK.

LRGF tracks MSCI USA Diversified Multi-Factor, while SCHK tracks Schwab 1000 Index. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for LRGF and 0.03% for SCHK.

SCHK currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.86 vs 1.69), 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 LRGF and SCHK

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