SCHA vs. RFG

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SCHA (Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF) and RFG (Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF) are both Small Cap Growth Equities funds - SCHA tracks the Dow Jones U.S. Small-Cap Total Stock Market Total Return Index while RFG tracks the S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SCHA returned 11.13%/yr vs 10.49%/yr for RFG. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SCHA charges 0.04%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for RFG.

Performance

SCHA vs. RFG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF (SCHA) and Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SCHA achieves a 19.79% return, which is significantly lower than RFG's 22.14% return. Over the past 10 years, SCHA has outperformed RFG with an annualized return of 11.13%, while RFG has yielded a comparatively lower 10.49% annualized return.

SCHA

• 1D: -0.58%
• 1M: 4.77%
• YTD: 19.79%
• 6M: 19.32%
• 1Y: 40.27%
• 3Y*: 18.92%
• 5Y*: 7.13%
• 10Y*: 11.13%

RFG

• 1D: 0.61%
• 1M: 7.30%
• YTD: 22.14%
• 6M: 21.89%
• 1Y: 32.96%
• 3Y*: 20.57%
• 5Y*: 8.63%
• 10Y*: 10.49%

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

SCHA vs. RFG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
SCHA Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF	19.79%	11.60%	11.16%	18.46%	-19.81%	16.45%	19.34%	26.50%	-11.79%	14.94%
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF	22.14%	8.80%	17.80%	16.42%	-21.70%	13.81%	32.86%	17.09%	-13.98%	20.46%

Correlation

The correlation between SCHA and RFG is 0.90, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.90
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.91
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.92
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Nov 4, 2009	0.92

The correlation between SCHA and RFG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.92 - a consistent structural relationship.

SCHA vs. RFG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SCHA	RFG
Technology	23.3%	21.2%
Financial Services	15.7%	3.7%
Industrials	15.4%	31.3%
Healthcare	13.5%	19.4%
Consumer Cyclical	9.0%	7.6%
Real Estate	6.0%	2.2%
Energy	5.5%	5.4%
Basic Materials	4.2%	3.3%
Consumer Defensive	2.6%	3.1%
Communication Services	2.4%	0.6%
Utilities	2.3%	2.4%

Return for Risk

SCHA vs. RFG — Risk / Return Rank

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

SCHA

SCHA Risk / Return Rank: 71
SCHA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 66
SCHA Sortino Ratio Rank: 67
SCHA Omega Ratio Rank: 60
SCHA Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
SCHA Martin Ratio Rank: 79

RFG

RFG Risk / Return Rank: 57
RFG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
RFG Sortino Ratio Rank: 52
RFG Omega Ratio Rank: 49
RFG Calmar Ratio Rank: 65
RFG Martin Ratio Rank: 69

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.

SCHA vs. RFG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF (SCHA) and Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG). 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.

	SCHA	RFG	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.25	1.79	+0.47
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.16	2.55	+0.61
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.31	+0.07
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.26	3.18	+1.07
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	15.66	12.89	+2.76
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SCHA vs. RFG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SCHA Sharpe Ratio is 2.25, which is comparable to the RFG Sharpe Ratio of 1.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SCHA and RFG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	SCHA	RFG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.25	1.79	+0.47
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.33	0.38	-0.05
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.49	0.46	+0.04
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.57	0.43	+0.14

Drawdowns

SCHA vs. RFG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SCHA drawdown since its inception was -42.41%, smaller than the maximum RFG drawdown of -51.93%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SCHA and RFG.

Drawdown Indicators

	SCHA	RFG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.41%	-51.93%	+9.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.50%	-10.41%	+0.91%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-27.29%	-26.71%	-0.58%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-30.79%	-35.16%	+4.37%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-42.41%	-42.92%	+0.51%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.58%	0.00%	-0.58%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.58%	-8.97%	+1.39%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.58%	2.56%	+0.02%

Volatility

SCHA vs. RFG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF (SCHA) is 5.08%, while Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF (RFG) has a volatility of 6.50%. This indicates that SCHA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than RFG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SCHA	RFG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.08%	6.50%	-1.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.83%	14.72%	-1.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	18.01%	18.53%	-0.52%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.93%	22.81%	-0.88%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.71%	23.05%	-0.34%

SCHA vs. RFG - Expense Ratio Comparison

SCHA has a 0.04% expense ratio, which is lower than RFG's 0.35% expense ratio.

Dividends

SCHA vs. RFG - Dividend Comparison

SCHA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.00%, more than RFG's 0.31% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
RFG Invesco S&P MidCap 400® Pure Growth ETF	0.31%	0.43%	0.38%	0.99%	0.78%	0.05%	0.27%	0.64%	0.76%	0.66%	0.35%	0.61%
SCHA Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF	1.00%	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

Can I hold both SCHA and RFG in my portfolio?

SCHA and RFG have a correlation of 0.90, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SCHA or RFG?

RFG has higher volatility (6.50%) compared to SCHA (5.08%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SCHA dropped -42.41% vs RFG's -51.93%.

Which ETF is better, SCHA or RFG?

On 10-year performance, SCHA leads with 11.13% vs 10.49% for RFG. On fees, SCHA is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, SCHA has been the lower-risk option at 5.08%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SCHA or RFG?

Over the 10-year period, SCHA has performed better with a 11.13% return vs 10.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SCHA or RFG?

SCHA is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for RFG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SCHA or RFG?

SCHA has the higher dividend yield at 1.00%, compared with 0.31% for RFG.

What is the main difference between SCHA and RFG?

SCHA tracks Dow Jones U.S. Small-Cap Total Stock Market Total Return Index, while RFG tracks S&P Mid Cap 400 Pure Growth. They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.04% for SCHA and 0.35% for RFG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SCHA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.25 vs 1.79), 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.