PWZ vs. SCHP
PWZ (Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF) and SCHP (Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - PWZ is a Municipal Bonds fund tracking the ICE BofA California Long-Term Core Plus Muni, while SCHP is a Inflation-Protected Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg US Treasury Inflation-Linked Bond Index (Series-L). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, PWZ returned 1.81%/yr vs 2.52%/yr for SCHP. At a 0.43 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. PWZ charges 0.28%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for SCHP.
Performance
PWZ vs. SCHP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, PWZ achieves a 2.80% return, which is significantly higher than SCHP's 0.81% return. Over the past 10 years, PWZ has underperformed SCHP with an annualized return of 1.81%, while SCHP has yielded a comparatively higher 2.52% annualized return.
PWZ
- 1D
- 0.10%
- 1M
- 2.19%
- YTD
- 2.80%
- 6M
- 2.89%
- 1Y
- 8.71%
- 3Y*
- 2.96%
- 5Y*
- 0.19%
- 10Y*
- 1.81%
SCHP
- 1D
- -0.42%
- 1M
- -0.18%
- YTD
- 0.81%
- 6M
- 0.92%
- 1Y
- 3.57%
- 3Y*
- 3.67%
- 5Y*
- 0.94%
- 10Y*
- 2.52%
PWZ vs. SCHP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PWZ Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF | 2.80% | 1.26% | 2.16% | 6.55% | -11.35% | 1.94% | 4.90% | 8.72% | 0.32% | 6.82% |
SCHP Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF | 0.81% | 6.76% | 1.95% | 3.91% | -12.02% | 5.87% | 10.86% | 8.52% | -1.78% | 3.02% |
Correlation
The correlation between PWZ and SCHP is 0.52, 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 | 0.52 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.56 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.50 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.47 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 5, 2010 | 0.43 |
The correlation between PWZ and SCHP shifts across timeframes, from 0.43 (all time) to 0.56 (3 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
PWZ vs. SCHP — Risk / Return Rank
PWZ
SCHP
PWZ vs. SCHP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF (PWZ) and Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF (SCHP). 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.
| PWZ | SCHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.97 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.51 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.42 | 1.19 | +0.23 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.52 | 1.86 | +0.66 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 9.11 | 5.54 | +3.57 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
PWZ vs. SCHP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PWZ drawdown since its inception was -21.49%, which is greater than SCHP's maximum drawdown of -14.26%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PWZ and SCHP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| PWZ | SCHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -21.49% | -14.26% | -7.23% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -3.47% | -1.93% | -1.54% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -9.09% | -4.48% | -4.61% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -17.56% | -14.26% | -3.30% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -17.56% | -14.26% | -3.30% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.22% | -1.04% | +0.82% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.53% | -3.93% | +0.40% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.96% | 0.65% | +0.31% |
Volatility
PWZ vs. SCHP - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF (PWZ) is 1.06%, while Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF (SCHP) has a volatility of 1.20%. This indicates that PWZ experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SCHP based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| PWZ | SCHP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 1.06% | 1.20% | -0.14% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 3.05% | 2.39% | +0.66% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 4.29% | 3.35% | +0.94% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 6.25% | 6.11% | +0.14% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 5.89% | 5.60% | +0.29% |
PWZ vs. SCHP - Expense Ratio Comparison
PWZ has a 0.28% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHP's 0.03% expense ratio.
Dividends
PWZ vs. SCHP - Dividend Comparison
PWZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.88%, less than SCHP's 4.02% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PWZ Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF | 3.88% | 3.41% | 3.28% | 2.84% | 2.49% | 2.28% | 2.34% | 2.51% | 2.53% | 2.48% | 2.86% | 3.16% |
SCHP Schwab U.S. TIPS ETF | 4.02% | 4.06% | 2.99% | 3.02% | 7.19% | 4.39% | 1.11% | 2.02% | 2.26% | 1.90% | 1.38% | 0.28% |
Frequently Asked Questions
PWZ and SCHP have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
SCHP has higher volatility (1.20%) compared to PWZ (1.06%). In terms of maximum drawdown, PWZ dropped -21.49% vs SCHP's -14.26%.
On 10-year performance, SCHP leads with 2.52% vs 1.81% for PWZ. On fees, SCHP is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, PWZ has been the lower-risk option at 1.06%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, SCHP has performed better with a 2.52% return vs 1.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SCHP is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.28% for PWZ.
SCHP has the higher dividend yield at 4.02%, compared with 3.88% for PWZ.
PWZ is categorized as Municipal Bonds, while SCHP is Inflation-Protected Bonds. PWZ tracks ICE BofA California Long-Term Core Plus Muni, while SCHP tracks Bloomberg US Treasury Inflation-Linked Bond Index (Series-L). They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.28% for PWZ and 0.03% for SCHP.
PWZ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.04 vs 1.07), 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 PWZ and SCHP
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