MCDS vs. SCHM

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

MCDS (JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF) and SCHM (Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. MCDS is actively managed, while SCHM is passively managed. Over the past year, MCDS returned 21.68% vs 25.02% for SCHM. Their correlation of 0.94 means they have usually moved in the same direction. MCDS charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SCHM.

Performance

MCDS vs. SCHM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF (MCDS) and Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF (SCHM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

The year-to-date returns for both investments are quite close, with MCDS having a 15.90% return and SCHM slightly higher at 16.02%.

MCDS

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: 0.05%
• 6M: 13.29%
• YTD: 15.90%
• 1Y: 21.68%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —
• ALL TIME*: 16.65%

SCHM

• 1D: -0.26%
• 1M: -3.53%
• 6M: 10.34%
• YTD: 16.02%
• 1Y: 25.02%
• 3Y*: 13.82%
• 5Y*: 7.49%
• 10Y*: 10.84%
• ALL TIME*: 11.17%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
MCDS JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF	$117.48K	$57.47K	$28.02K
SCHM Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF	$34.02M	$31.86M	$37.33M

MCDS vs. SCHM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
MCDS JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF	15.90%	6.51%	9.83%
SCHM Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF	16.02%	10.17%	10.89%

Correlation

The correlation between MCDS and SCHM is 0.92, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 8, 2024	0.94

The correlation between MCDS and SCHM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

MCDS vs. SCHM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	MCDS	SCHM
Technology	18.6%	22.0%
Industrials	17.2%	21.9%
Financial Services	12.9%	11.1%
Healthcare	11.0%	11.6%
Consumer Cyclical	10.4%	10.9%
Real Estate	6.7%	6.5%
Utilities	6.5%	2.9%
Energy	5.9%	3.2%
Consumer Defensive	4.7%	3.4%
Basic Materials	3.6%	4.1%
Communication Services	2.5%	2.4%

Return for Risk

MCDS vs. SCHM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

MCDS

MCDS Risk / Return Rank: 71
MCDS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 65
MCDS Sortino Ratio Rank: 70
MCDS Omega Ratio Rank: 63
MCDS Calmar Ratio Rank: 76
MCDS Martin Ratio Rank: 79

SCHM

SCHM Risk / Return Rank: 64
SCHM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 60
SCHM Sortino Ratio Rank: 62
SCHM Omega Ratio Rank: 57
SCHM Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
SCHM Martin Ratio Rank: 71

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

MCDS vs. SCHM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF (MCDS) and Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF (SCHM). 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.

	MCDS	SCHM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.53	1.39	+0.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.28	2.06	+0.23
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.27	1.25	+0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.73	2.49	+0.23
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.41	8.79	+1.62

MCDS vs. SCHM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MCDS Sharpe Ratio is 1.53, which is comparable to the SCHM Sharpe Ratio of 1.39. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MCDS and SCHM, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

MCDS vs. SCHM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MCDS drawdown since its inception was -22.50%, smaller than the maximum SCHM drawdown of -42.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MCDS and SCHM.

Drawdown Indicators

	MCDS	SCHM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-22.50%	-42.43%	+19.93%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.47%	-9.32%	+1.85%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-23.27%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-26.46%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-42.43%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.50%	-5.89%	+5.39%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.72%	-5.63%	+1.91%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.95%	2.64%	-0.69%

Volatility

MCDS vs. SCHM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF (MCDS) is 2.30%, while Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF (SCHM) has a volatility of 4.50%. This indicates that MCDS experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SCHM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	MCDS	SCHM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.30%	4.50%	-2.20%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	9.90%	13.07%	-3.17%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.31%	16.71%	-3.40%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.58%	19.68%	-3.10%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.58%	20.49%	-3.91%

MCDS vs. SCHM - Expense Ratio Comparison

MCDS has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHM's 0.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

MCDS vs. SCHM - Dividend Comparison

MCDS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.04%, less than SCHM's 1.27% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MCDS JPMorgan Fundamental Data Science Mid Core ETF	1.04%	1.23%	0.64%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SCHM Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF	1.27%	1.46%	1.43%	1.50%	1.67%	1.13%	1.31%	1.48%	1.56%	1.27%	1.51%	1.54%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both MCDS and SCHM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.92, MCDS and SCHM 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.

Which is riskier, MCDS or SCHM?

SCHM has higher volatility (4.50%) compared to MCDS (2.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MCDS dropped -22.50% vs SCHM's -42.43%.

Which ETF is better, MCDS or SCHM?

On 1-year performance, SCHM leads with 25.02% vs 21.68% for MCDS. On fees, SCHM is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, MCDS has been the lower-risk option at 2.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, MCDS or SCHM?

Over the 1-year period, SCHM has performed better with a 25.02% return vs 21.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, MCDS or SCHM?

SCHM is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for MCDS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, MCDS or SCHM?

SCHM has the higher dividend yield at 1.27%, compared with 1.04% for MCDS.

What is the main difference between MCDS and SCHM?

They also come from different issuers: JPMorgan and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for MCDS and 0.04% for SCHM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

MCDS currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.53 vs 1.39), 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.