SCHG vs. GRW

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) and GRW (TCW Durable Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. SCHG is passively managed, while GRW is actively managed. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SCHG charges 0.04%/yr vs 0.75%/yr for GRW.

Performance

SCHG vs. GRW - Performance Comparison

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

Returns By Period

SCHG

• 1D: 0.35%
• 1M: 4.73%
• YTD: 6.78%
• 6M: 6.01%
• 1Y: 24.63%
• 3Y*: 25.14%
• 5Y*: 15.67%
• 10Y*: 18.74%

GRW

• 1D: 0.18%
• 1M: —
• YTD: —
• 6M: —
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SCHG vs. GRW - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF	-0.57%
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	1.46%

Correlation

The correlation between SCHG and GRW 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 (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 29, 2026	0.90

SCHG vs. GRW - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SCHG	GRW
Technology	46.3%	26.6%
Communication Services	16.0%	9.1%
Consumer Cyclical	12.7%	8.3%
Healthcare	7.7%	4.1%
Financial Services	6.7%	9.8%
Industrials	5.8%	38.1%
Consumer Defensive	1.7%	-
Basic Materials	1.4%	4.0%
Energy	0.8%	-
Real Estate	0.5%	-
Utilities	0.4%	-

Return for Risk

SCHG vs. GRW — Risk / Return Rank

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

SCHG

SCHG Risk / Return Rank: 40
SCHG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 46
SCHG Sortino Ratio Rank: 44
SCHG Omega Ratio Rank: 45
SCHG Calmar Ratio Rank: 31
SCHG Martin Ratio Rank: 34

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. GRW - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) and TCW Durable Growth ETF (GRW). 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.

	SCHG	GRW	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.60	—	—
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.18	—	—
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.28	—	—
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.51	—	—
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	5.04	—	—
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	SCHG	GRW	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.60	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.71	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.87	—	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.85	13.58	-12.73

Drawdowns

SCHG vs. GRW - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SCHG drawdown since its inception was -34.59%, which is greater than GRW's maximum drawdown of -0.45%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SCHG and GRW.

Drawdown Indicators

	SCHG	GRW	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-34.59%	-0.45%	-34.14%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.41%	—	—
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 Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.44%	-0.27%	-1.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.20%	-0.17%	-5.03%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.90%	—	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	SCHG	GRW	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.61%	—	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.62%	—	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.49%	8.89%	+6.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	22.26%	8.89%	+13.37%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	21.55%	8.89%	+12.66%

SCHG vs. GRW - Expense Ratio Comparison

SCHG has a 0.04% expense ratio, which is lower than GRW's 0.75% expense ratio.

Dividends

SCHG vs. GRW - Dividend Comparison

SCHG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.36%, while GRW has not paid dividends to shareholders.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
GRW TCW Durable Growth ETF	0.00%	0.00%	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	0.36%	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 GRW in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.90, SCHG and GRW move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which ETF is better, SCHG or GRW?

On fees, SCHG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF is cheaper, SCHG or GRW?

SCHG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.75% for GRW.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SCHG or GRW?

SCHG has the higher dividend yield at 0.36%, compared with 0.00% for GRW.

What is the main difference between SCHG and GRW?

They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and TCW. Their fees differ too: 0.04% for SCHG and 0.75% for GRW.