SCHG vs. CNQ

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) is Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index, while CNQ (Canadian Natural Resources Limited) is a stock. Over the past 10 years, SCHG returned 18.50%/yr vs 17.89%/yr for CNQ. At a 0.39 correlation, their price movements are largely independent.

Performance

SCHG vs. CNQ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) and Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SCHG achieves a 2.58% return, which is significantly lower than CNQ's 35.04% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with SCHG having a 18.50% annualized return and CNQ not far behind at 17.89%.

SCHG

• 1D: 0.12%
• 1M: -3.66%
• YTD: 2.58%
• 6M: 2.96%
• 1Y: 20.32%
• 3Y*: 22.68%
• 5Y*: 14.33%
• 10Y*: 18.50%

CNQ

• 1D: -0.31%
• 1M: -4.77%
• YTD: 35.04%
• 6M: 38.56%
• 1Y: 38.90%
• 3Y*: 23.03%
• 5Y*: 26.12%
• 10Y*: 17.89%

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

SCHG vs. CNQ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF	2.58%	17.50%	34.95%	50.10%	-31.80%	28.11%	39.14%	36.02%	-1.36%	28.05%
CNQ Canadian Natural Resources Limited	35.04%	15.58%	-1.31%	23.72%	42.82%	83.55%	-19.06%	39.72%	-29.92%	15.97%

Correlation

The correlation between SCHG and CNQ is -0.16, meaning they tend to move in opposite directions. This is especially valuable for risk management - when one declines, the other has historically tended to hold steady or rise.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	-0.16
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.09
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.21
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.28
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 11, 2009	0.39

The correlation between SCHG and CNQ shifts across timeframes, from -0.16 (1 year) to 0.39 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Return for Risk

SCHG vs. CNQ — Risk / Return Rank

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

SCHG

SCHG Risk / Return Rank: 33
SCHG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 37
SCHG Sortino Ratio Rank: 35
SCHG Omega Ratio Rank: 36
SCHG Calmar Ratio Rank: 27
SCHG Martin Ratio Rank: 30

CNQ

CNQ Risk / Return Rank: 81
CNQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
CNQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
CNQ Omega Ratio Rank: 76
CNQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 85
CNQ Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

SCHG vs. CNQ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) and Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ). 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.

	SCHG	CNQ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.18	1.51	-0.33
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.64	1.98	-0.34
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.21	1.25	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.14	3.09	-1.94
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.78	6.92	-3.15

SCHG vs. CNQ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SCHG Sharpe Ratio is 1.18, which is comparable to the CNQ Sharpe Ratio of 1.51. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SCHG and CNQ, 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

SCHG vs. CNQ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SCHG drawdown since its inception was -34.59%, smaller than the maximum CNQ drawdown of -80.75%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SCHG and CNQ.

Drawdown Indicators

	SCHG	CNQ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.59%	-80.75%	+46.16%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.41%	-14.16%	-2.25%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.39%	-35.85%	+12.46%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-34.59%	-35.85%	+1.26%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.59%	-77.84%	+43.25%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.33%	-9.57%	+4.24%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.20%	-23.51%	+18.31%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.96%	6.30%	-1.34%

Volatility

SCHG vs. CNQ - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) is 5.14%, while Canadian Natural Resources Limited (CNQ) has a volatility of 8.56%. This indicates that SCHG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CNQ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SCHG	CNQ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.14%	8.56%	-3.42%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.30%	24.09%	-11.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.95%	29.06%	-13.11%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.33%	32.86%	-10.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.58%	40.24%	-18.66%

Dividends

SCHG vs. CNQ - Dividend Comparison

SCHG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.38%, less than CNQ's 3.84% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CNQ Canadian Natural Resources Limited	2.89%	5.01%	5.02%	4.17%	6.31%	3.78%	5.26%	3.49%	4.56%	3.08%	2.94%	4.21%
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

Can I hold both SCHG and CNQ in my portfolio?

SCHG and CNQ have a correlation of -0.16, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SCHG or CNQ?

CNQ has higher volatility (8.56%) compared to SCHG (5.14%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SCHG dropped -34.59% vs CNQ's -80.75%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

CNQ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.51 vs 1.18), 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.