PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
QWLD vs. SCHG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

QWLD vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QWLD achieves a 5.45% return, which is significantly higher than SCHG's 1.35% return. Over the past 10 years, QWLD has underperformed SCHG with an annualized return of 11.74%, while SCHG has yielded a comparatively higher 18.65% annualized return.


QWLD

1D
-0.53%
1M
-1.39%
YTD
5.45%
6M
5.01%
1Y
15.86%
3Y*
15.71%
5Y*
9.75%
10Y*
11.74%

SCHG

1D
-1.37%
1M
-3.93%
YTD
1.35%
6M
0.09%
1Y
17.91%
3Y*
22.13%
5Y*
13.27%
10Y*
18.65%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

QWLD vs. SCHG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
QWLD
SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF
5.45%17.93%14.44%19.59%-13.30%21.57%10.24%27.59%-7.02%22.44%
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
1.35%17.50%34.95%50.10%-31.80%28.11%39.14%36.02%-1.36%28.05%

Correlation

The correlation between QWLD and SCHG is 0.69, 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

0.69

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

0.73

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

0.81

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.74

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 5, 2014

0.68

The correlation between QWLD and SCHG shifts across timeframes, from 0.68 (all time) to 0.81 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

QWLD vs. SCHG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
QWLD
SCHG

Technology

25.9%
46.7%

Financial Services

14.5%
6.6%

Healthcare

12.7%
8.4%

Communication Services

9.2%
15.3%

Industrials

8.1%
6.0%

Consumer Defensive

7.4%
1.6%

Consumer Cyclical

5.1%
12.4%

Utilities

3.8%
0.4%

Energy

3.3%
0.7%

Basic Materials

2.2%
1.3%

Real Estate

0.5%
0.5%

Technology

QWLD
25.9%
SCHG
46.7%

Financial Services

QWLD
14.5%
SCHG
6.6%

Healthcare

QWLD
12.7%
SCHG
8.4%

Communication Services

QWLD
9.2%
SCHG
15.3%

Industrials

QWLD
8.1%
SCHG
6.0%

Consumer Defensive

QWLD
7.4%
SCHG
1.6%

Consumer Cyclical

QWLD
5.1%
SCHG
12.4%

Utilities

QWLD
3.8%
SCHG
0.4%

Energy

QWLD
3.3%
SCHG
0.7%

Basic Materials

QWLD
2.2%
SCHG
1.3%

Real Estate

QWLD
0.5%
SCHG
0.5%

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

QWLD vs. SCHG — Risk / Return Rank

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

QWLD
QWLD Risk / Return Rank: 4949
Overall Rank
QWLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
QWLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 5050
Sortino Ratio Rank
QWLD Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
QWLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 4444
Calmar Ratio Rank
QWLD Martin Ratio Rank: 5454
Martin Ratio Rank

SCHG
SCHG Risk / Return Rank: 2828
Overall Rank
SCHG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3131
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SCHG Sortino Ratio Rank: 3030
Sortino Ratio Rank
SCHG Omega Ratio Rank: 3030
Omega Ratio Rank
SCHG Calmar Ratio Rank: 2323
Calmar Ratio Rank
SCHG Martin Ratio Rank: 2727
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.

QWLD vs. SCHG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD) 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.


QWLDSCHGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.51

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.77

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.29

1.20

+0.09

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.08

1.10

+0.98

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

8.96

3.58

+5.38

QWLD vs. SCHG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QWLD Sharpe Ratio is 1.62, which is higher than the SCHG Sharpe Ratio of 1.11. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QWLD 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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

QWLD vs. SCHG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QWLD drawdown since its inception was -31.89%, smaller than the maximum SCHG drawdown of -34.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QWLD and SCHG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


QWLDSCHGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-31.89%

-34.59%

+2.70%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.66%

-16.41%

+8.75%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.40%

-23.39%

+10.99%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-22.84%

-34.59%

+11.75%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-31.89%

-34.59%

+2.70%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.77%

-6.46%

+4.69%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.69%

-5.20%

+1.51%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.77%

5.02%

-3.25%

Volatility

QWLD vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD) is 2.82%, while Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) has a volatility of 5.91%. This indicates that QWLD experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SCHG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


QWLDSCHGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.82%

5.91%

-3.09%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.82%

12.52%

-4.70%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

9.84%

16.24%

-6.40%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.54%

22.38%

-8.84%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

15.18%

21.58%

-6.40%

QWLD vs. SCHG - Expense Ratio Comparison

QWLD has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHG's 0.04% expense ratio.


Dividends

QWLD vs. SCHG - Dividend Comparison

QWLD's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.85%, more than SCHG's 0.38% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
QWLD
SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF
1.85%1.85%1.74%1.78%2.02%1.77%1.77%2.13%2.33%2.73%2.22%3.42%
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
0.38%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


QWLD and SCHG have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

SCHG has higher volatility (5.91%) compared to QWLD (2.82%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QWLD dropped -31.89% vs SCHG's -34.59%.

On 10-year performance, SCHG leads with 18.65% vs 11.74% for QWLD. On fees, SCHG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, QWLD has been the lower-risk option at 2.82%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, SCHG has performed better with a 18.65% return vs 11.74%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SCHG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for QWLD.

QWLD has the higher dividend yield at 1.85%, compared with 0.38% for SCHG.

QWLD tracks MSCI World Factor Mix A-Series (USD), while SCHG tracks Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for QWLD and 0.04% for SCHG.

QWLD currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.62 vs 1.11), 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 QWLD and SCHG

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