MJ vs. SCHA
MJ (ETFMG Alternative Harvest ETF) and SCHA (Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds - MJ tracks the Prime Alternative Harvest Index while SCHA tracks the Dow Jones U.S. Small-Cap Total Stock Market Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 5 years, MJ returned -34.66%/yr vs 7.31%/yr for SCHA. A 0.55 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. MJ charges 0.75%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SCHA.
Performance
MJ vs. SCHA - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, MJ achieves a -9.67% return, which is significantly lower than SCHA's 20.80% return.
MJ
- 1D
- 5.12%
- 1M
- -1.68%
- YTD
- -9.67%
- 6M
- 1.68%
- 1Y
- 48.56%
- 3Y*
- -5.79%
- 5Y*
- -34.66%
- 10Y*
- —
SCHA
- 1D
- 0.85%
- 1M
- 3.65%
- YTD
- 20.80%
- 6M
- 19.63%
- 1Y
- 41.92%
- 3Y*
- 19.74%
- 5Y*
- 7.31%
- 10Y*
- 11.12%
MJ vs. SCHA - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MJ ETFMG Alternative Harvest ETF | -9.67% | 13.07% | -23.97% | -24.18% | -61.55% | -22.79% | -16.18% | -31.36% | -22.57% |
SCHA Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF | 20.80% | 11.60% | 11.16% | 18.46% | -19.81% | 16.45% | 19.34% | 26.50% | -10.26% |
Correlation
The correlation between MJ and SCHA is 0.40, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.40 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.44 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.57 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 8, 2018 | 0.55 |
The correlation between MJ and SCHA shifts across timeframes, from 0.40 (1 year) to 0.57 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
MJ vs. SCHA - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
MJ
SCHA
Healthcare
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Consumer Cyclical
Technology
Financial Services
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Energy
-
Industrials
-
Utilities
-
Healthcare
MJ
SCHA
Consumer Defensive
MJ
SCHA
Real Estate
MJ
SCHA
Consumer Cyclical
MJ
SCHA
Technology
MJ
SCHA
Financial Services
MJ
SCHA
Basic Materials
MJ
-
SCHA
Communication Services
MJ
-
SCHA
Energy
MJ
-
SCHA
Industrials
MJ
-
SCHA
Utilities
MJ
-
SCHA
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
MJ vs. SCHA — Risk / Return Rank
MJ
SCHA
MJ vs. SCHA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for ETFMG Alternative Harvest ETF (MJ) and Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF (SCHA). 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.
| MJ | SCHA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -1.78 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -1.64 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.19 | 1.39 | -0.21 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.00 | 4.43 | -3.43 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 1.79 | 16.30 | -14.51 |
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
| MJ | SCHA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.56 | 2.35 | -1.78 |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | -0.58 | 0.33 | -0.92 |
Sharpe Ratio (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | — | 0.49 | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | -0.48 | 0.58 | -1.05 |
Drawdowns
MJ vs. SCHA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum MJ drawdown since its inception was -96.55%, which is greater than SCHA's maximum drawdown of -42.41%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MJ and SCHA.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MJ | SCHA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -96.55% | -42.41% | -54.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -48.66% | -9.50% | -39.16% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -69.73% | -27.29% | -42.44% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -93.27% | -30.79% | -62.48% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -42.41% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -94.17% | 0.00% | -94.17% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -69.21% | -7.58% | -61.63% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 27.16% | 2.58% | +24.58% |
Volatility
MJ vs. SCHA - Volatility Comparison
ETFMG Alternative Harvest ETF (MJ) has a higher volatility of 12.93% compared to Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF (SCHA) at 4.81%. This indicates that MJ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SCHA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MJ | SCHA | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 12.93% | 4.81% | +8.12% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 59.52% | 12.84% | +46.68% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 86.83% | 17.96% | +68.87% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 59.93% | 21.94% | +37.99% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 55.75% | 22.71% | +33.04% |
MJ vs. SCHA - Expense Ratio Comparison
MJ has a 0.75% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHA's 0.04% expense ratio.
Dividends
MJ vs. SCHA - Dividend Comparison
MJ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.20%, more than SCHA's 0.99% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MJ ETFMG Alternative Harvest ETF | 2.20% | 1.98% | 13.80% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
SCHA Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF | 0.99% | 1.26% | 1.51% | 1.42% | 1.37% | 1.19% | 1.05% | 1.39% | 1.58% | 1.24% | 1.50% | 1.48% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MJ and SCHA have a correlation of 0.40, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
MJ has higher volatility (12.93%) compared to SCHA (4.81%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MJ dropped -96.55% vs SCHA's -42.41%.
On 5-year performance, SCHA leads with 7.31% vs -34.66% for MJ. On fees, SCHA is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, SCHA has been the lower-risk option at 4.81%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 5-year period, SCHA has performed better with a 7.31% return vs -34.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SCHA is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for MJ.
MJ has the higher dividend yield at 2.20%, compared with 0.99% for SCHA.
MJ tracks Prime Alternative Harvest Index, while SCHA tracks Dow Jones U.S. Small-Cap Total Stock Market Index. They also come from different issuers: ETFMG and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.75% for MJ and 0.04% for SCHA.
SCHA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.35 vs 0.56), 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 MJ and SCHA
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