PSIL vs. SCHG

Last updated Jun 16, 2026

PSIL (AdvisorShares Psychedelics ETF) and SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PSIL is a Health & Biotech Equities fund actively managed by AdvisorShares, while SCHG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index. PSIL is actively managed, while SCHG is passively managed. Over the past 3 years, PSIL returned 6.03%/yr vs 23.27%/yr for SCHG. At a 0.38 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PSIL charges 1.00%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SCHG.

Performance

PSIL vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AdvisorShares Psychedelics ETF (PSIL) 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, PSIL achieves a 12.35% return, which is significantly higher than SCHG's 5.03% return.

PSIL

• 1D: -4.32%
• 1M: -3.41%
• YTD: 12.35%
• 6M: 10.46%
• 1Y: 52.66%
• 3Y*: 6.03%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

SCHG

• 1D: 2.39%
• 1M: -0.12%
• YTD: 5.03%
• 6M: 5.98%
• 1Y: 23.20%
• 3Y*: 23.27%
• 5Y*: 14.85%
• 10Y*: 18.85%

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

PSIL vs. SCHG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021
PSIL AdvisorShares Psychedelics ETF	12.35%	74.55%	-19.50%	-25.12%	-67.24%	-42.72%
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF	5.03%	17.50%	34.95%	50.10%	-31.80%	5.28%

Correlation

The correlation between PSIL and SCHG is 0.43, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.43
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.34
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 16, 2021	0.38

PSIL vs. SCHG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	PSIL	SCHG
Healthcare	100.0%	8.4%
Basic Materials	-	1.3%
Communication Services	-	15.3%
Consumer Cyclical	-	12.4%
Consumer Defensive	-	1.6%
Energy	-	0.7%
Financial Services	-	6.6%
Industrials	-	6.0%
Real Estate	-	0.5%
Technology	-	46.7%
Utilities	-	0.4%

Return for Risk

PSIL vs. SCHG — Risk / Return Rank

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

PSIL

PSIL Risk / Return Rank: 39
PSIL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 35
PSIL Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
PSIL Omega Ratio Rank: 34
PSIL Calmar Ratio Rank: 54
PSIL Martin Ratio Rank: 36

SCHG

SCHG Risk / Return Rank: 40
SCHG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
SCHG Sortino Ratio Rank: 43
SCHG Omega Ratio Rank: 44
SCHG Calmar Ratio Rank: 32
SCHG Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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.

PSIL vs. SCHG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AdvisorShares Psychedelics ETF (PSIL) 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.

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.

	PSIL	SCHG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.25	1.45	-0.20
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.80	1.98	-0.19
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.23	1.26	-0.03
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.60	1.42	+1.18
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.38	4.68	+0.70

PSIL vs. SCHG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current PSIL Sharpe Ratio is 1.25, which is comparable to the SCHG Sharpe Ratio of 1.45. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of PSIL 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.

Drawdowns

PSIL vs. SCHG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum PSIL drawdown since its inception was -92.72%, which is greater than SCHG's maximum drawdown of -34.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PSIL and SCHG.

Drawdown Indicators

	PSIL	SCHG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-92.72%	-34.59%	-58.13%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-20.38%	-16.41%	-3.97%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-64.62%	-23.39%	-41.23%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-34.59%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-34.59%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-78.15%	-3.06%	-75.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-76.71%	-5.20%	-71.51%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	9.81%	4.97%	+4.84%

Volatility

PSIL vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison

AdvisorShares Psychedelics ETF (PSIL) has a higher volatility of 12.21% compared to Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) at 5.59%. This indicates that PSIL's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SCHG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	PSIL	SCHG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	12.21%	5.59%	+6.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	28.74%	12.52%	+16.22%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	42.53%	16.09%	+26.44%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	63.03%	22.35%	+40.68%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	63.03%	21.60%	+41.43%

PSIL vs. SCHG - Expense Ratio Comparison

PSIL has a 1.00% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHG's 0.04% expense ratio.

Dividends

PSIL vs. SCHG - Dividend Comparison

PSIL's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 8.90%, more than SCHG's 0.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PSIL AdvisorShares Psychedelics ETF	8.90%	10.95%	1.49%	0.24%	2.91%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
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 PSIL and SCHG in my portfolio?

PSIL and SCHG have a correlation of 0.43, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, PSIL or SCHG?

PSIL has higher volatility (12.21%) compared to SCHG (5.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PSIL dropped -92.72% vs SCHG's -34.59%.

Which ETF is better, PSIL or SCHG?

On 3-year performance, SCHG leads with 23.27% vs 6.03% for PSIL. On fees, SCHG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, SCHG has been the lower-risk option at 5.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, PSIL or SCHG?

Over the 3-year period, SCHG has performed better with a 23.27% return vs 6.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, PSIL or SCHG?

SCHG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 1.00% for PSIL.

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

PSIL has the higher dividend yield at 8.90%, compared with 0.37% for SCHG.

What is the main difference between PSIL and SCHG?

PSIL is categorized as Health & Biotech Equities, while SCHG is Large Cap Growth Equities. They also come from different issuers: AdvisorShares and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 1.00% for PSIL and 0.04% for SCHG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SCHG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.45 vs 1.25), 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.