RSMV vs. SCHG
RSMV (Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF) and SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. RSMV is actively managed, while SCHG is passively managed. Over the past year, RSMV returned 27.01% vs 20.89% for SCHG. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RSMV charges 0.95%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SCHG.
Performance
RSMV vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, RSMV achieves a 10.03% return, which is significantly higher than SCHG's 2.76% return.
RSMV
- 1D
- 0.67%
- 1M
- 3.73%
- YTD
- 10.03%
- 6M
- 9.46%
- 1Y
- 27.01%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SCHG
- 1D
- -1.24%
- 1M
- -2.59%
- YTD
- 2.76%
- 6M
- 2.11%
- 1Y
- 20.89%
- 3Y*
- 22.70%
- 5Y*
- 13.68%
- 10Y*
- 18.81%
RSMV vs. SCHG - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
RSMV Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF | 10.03% | 10.74% |
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF | 2.76% | 18.52% |
Correlation
The correlation between RSMV and SCHG is 0.70, 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 | 0.70 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 14, 2025 | 0.75 |
The correlation between RSMV and SCHG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.
RSMV vs. SCHG - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
RSMV
SCHG
Technology
Consumer Defensive
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Industrials
Communication Services
Energy
Healthcare
Basic Materials
Utilities
Real Estate
-
Technology
RSMV
SCHG
Consumer Defensive
RSMV
SCHG
Financial Services
RSMV
SCHG
Consumer Cyclical
RSMV
SCHG
Industrials
RSMV
SCHG
Communication Services
RSMV
SCHG
Energy
RSMV
SCHG
Healthcare
RSMV
SCHG
Basic Materials
RSMV
SCHG
Utilities
RSMV
SCHG
Real Estate
RSMV
-
SCHG
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
RSMV vs. SCHG — Risk / Return Rank
RSMV
SCHG
RSMV vs. SCHG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF (RSMV) 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.
| RSMV | SCHG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +0.79 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.03 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.38 | 1.23 | +0.14 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.73 | 1.28 | +2.45 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 13.61 | 4.19 | +9.42 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
RSMV vs. SCHG - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum RSMV drawdown since its inception was -17.58%, smaller than the maximum SCHG drawdown of -34.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RSMV and SCHG.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| RSMV | SCHG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -17.58% | -34.59% | +17.01% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.27% | -16.41% | +9.14% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -23.39% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -34.59% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -34.59% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -5.16% | +5.16% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.90% | -5.20% | +1.30% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.99% | 5.00% | -3.01% |
Volatility
RSMV vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison
Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF (RSMV) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) have volatilities of 6.05% and 5.78%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| RSMV | SCHG | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.05% | 5.78% | +0.27% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 11.00% | 12.50% | -1.50% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.02% | 16.21% | -3.19% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 14.99% | 22.37% | -7.38% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 14.99% | 21.61% | -6.62% |
RSMV vs. SCHG - Expense Ratio Comparison
RSMV has a 0.95% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHG's 0.04% expense ratio.
Dividends
RSMV vs. SCHG - Dividend Comparison
RSMV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.91%, more than SCHG's 0.38% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RSMV Relative Strength Managed Volatility Strategy ETF | 0.91% | 1.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
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
RSMV and SCHG have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
RSMV has higher volatility (6.05%) compared to SCHG (5.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RSMV dropped -17.58% vs SCHG's -34.59%.
On 1-year performance, RSMV leads with 27.01% vs 20.89% for SCHG. On fees, SCHG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, SCHG has been the lower-risk option at 5.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 1-year period, RSMV has performed better with a 27.01% return vs 20.89%. 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 0.95% for RSMV.
RSMV has the higher dividend yield at 0.91%, compared with 0.38% for SCHG.
They also come from different issuers: Teucrium and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.95% for RSMV and 0.04% for SCHG.
RSMV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.09 vs 1.30), 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 RSMV 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