SCHG vs. HYP
SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) and HYP (Golden Eagle Dynamic Hypergrowth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. SCHG is passively managed, while HYP is actively managed. A 0.62 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SCHG charges 0.04%/yr vs 0.85%/yr for HYP.
Performance
SCHG vs. HYP - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SCHG achieves a 6.78% return, which is significantly lower than HYP's 32.89% return.
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%
HYP
- 1D
- 1.19%
- 1M
- 6.48%
- YTD
- 32.89%
- 6M
- 28.18%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
SCHG vs. HYP - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF | 6.78% | 2.58% |
HYP Golden Eagle Dynamic Hypergrowth ETF | 32.89% | -5.01% |
Correlation
The correlation between SCHG and HYP is 0.62, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 24, 2025 | 0.62 |
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
SCHG vs. HYP — Risk / Return Rank
SCHG
HYP
SCHG vs. HYP - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) and Golden Eagle Dynamic Hypergrowth ETF (HYP). 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 | HYP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.28 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 1.51 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn 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. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| SCHG | HYP | 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 | 0.98 | -0.13 |
Drawdowns
SCHG vs. HYP - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SCHG drawdown since its inception was -34.59%, which is greater than HYP's maximum drawdown of -19.58%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SCHG and HYP.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SCHG | HYP | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -34.59% | -19.58% | -15.01% |
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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.44% | -1.11% | -0.33% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -5.20% | -6.42% | +1.22% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.90% | — | — |
Volatility
SCHG vs. HYP - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SCHG | HYP | 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% | 40.91% | -25.42% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 22.26% | 40.91% | -18.65% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 21.55% | 40.91% | -19.36% |
SCHG vs. HYP - Expense Ratio Comparison
SCHG has a 0.04% expense ratio, which is lower than HYP's 0.85% expense ratio.
Dividends
SCHG vs. HYP - Dividend Comparison
SCHG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.36%, more than HYP's 0.10% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HYP Golden Eagle Dynamic Hypergrowth ETF | 0.10% | 0.14% | 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
SCHG and HYP have a correlation of 0.62, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
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.
SCHG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.85% for HYP.
SCHG has the higher dividend yield at 0.36%, compared with 0.10% for HYP.
They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and Golden Eagle. Their fees differ too: 0.04% for SCHG and 0.85% for HYP.
Find the right allocation for SCHG and HYP
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