SCHM vs. FLDZ

Last updated Jun 26, 2026

SCHM (Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF) and FLDZ (RiverNorth Patriot ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds. SCHM is passively managed, while FLDZ is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, SCHM returned 18.54%/yr vs 13.86%/yr for FLDZ. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SCHM charges 0.04%/yr vs 0.77%/yr for FLDZ.

Performance

SCHM vs. FLDZ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF (SCHM) and RiverNorth Patriot ETF (FLDZ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SCHM achieves a 22.04% return, which is significantly higher than FLDZ's 7.72% return.

SCHM

• 1D: 1.96%
• 1M: 4.00%
• YTD: 22.04%
• 6M: 19.62%
• 1Y: 34.41%
• 3Y*: 18.54%
• 5Y*: 8.42%
• 10Y*: 12.31%

FLDZ

• 1D: 0.65%
• 1M: 2.42%
• YTD: 7.72%
• 6M: 6.10%
• 1Y: 11.13%
• 3Y*: 13.86%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SCHM vs. FLDZ - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
SCHM Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF	22.04%	10.17%	11.98%	16.69%	-17.07%
FLDZ RiverNorth Patriot ETF	7.72%	6.66%	15.99%	12.15%	-12.07%

Correlation

The correlation between SCHM and FLDZ is 0.87, 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	0.87
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.92
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 3, 2022	0.94

The correlation between SCHM and FLDZ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.87 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

SCHM vs. FLDZ - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SCHM	FLDZ
Technology	22.1%	2.8%
Industrials	21.7%	13.1%
Financial Services	10.9%	15.6%
Healthcare	10.9%	12.3%
Consumer Cyclical	10.8%	14.4%
Real Estate	6.4%	8.3%
Basic Materials	4.7%	1.6%
Consumer Defensive	3.4%	4.9%
Energy	3.4%	10.8%
Utilities	2.9%	11.6%
Communication Services	2.6%	4.0%

Return for Risk

SCHM vs. FLDZ — Risk / Return Rank

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

SCHM

SCHM Risk / Return Rank: 78
SCHM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 77
SCHM Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
SCHM Omega Ratio Rank: 72
SCHM Calmar Ratio Rank: 81
SCHM Martin Ratio Rank: 84

FLDZ

FLDZ Risk / Return Rank: 32
FLDZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 29
FLDZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 28
FLDZ Omega Ratio Rank: 26
FLDZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
FLDZ Martin Ratio Rank: 38

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.

SCHM vs. FLDZ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF (SCHM) and RiverNorth Patriot ETF (FLDZ). 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.

	SCHM	FLDZ	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.12	0.98	+1.14
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.95	1.46	+1.49
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.17	+0.19
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.71	1.79	+1.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.81	5.42	+9.39

SCHM vs. FLDZ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SCHM Sharpe Ratio is 2.12, which is higher than the FLDZ Sharpe Ratio of 0.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SCHM and FLDZ, 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

SCHM vs. FLDZ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SCHM drawdown since its inception was -42.43%, which is greater than FLDZ's maximum drawdown of -19.54%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SCHM and FLDZ.

Drawdown Indicators

	SCHM	FLDZ	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-42.43%	-19.54%	-22.89%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.32%	-6.25%	-3.07%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.27%	-17.43%	-5.84%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-26.46%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-42.43%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.64%	-5.91%	+0.27%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.33%	2.06%	+0.27%

Volatility

SCHM vs. FLDZ - Volatility Comparison

Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF (SCHM) has a higher volatility of 5.91% compared to RiverNorth Patriot ETF (FLDZ) at 2.95%. This indicates that SCHM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLDZ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SCHM	FLDZ	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.91%	2.95%	+2.96%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.69%	7.90%	+4.79%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.37%	11.44%	+4.93%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	19.68%	16.84%	+2.84%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.49%	16.84%	+3.65%

SCHM vs. FLDZ - Expense Ratio Comparison

SCHM has a 0.04% expense ratio, which is lower than FLDZ's 0.77% expense ratio.

Dividends

SCHM vs. FLDZ - Dividend Comparison

SCHM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.21%, less than FLDZ's 1.43% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FLDZ RiverNorth Patriot ETF	1.43%	1.54%	1.17%	1.39%	1.52%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SCHM Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF	1.21%	1.46%	1.43%	1.50%	1.67%	1.13%	1.31%	1.48%	1.56%	1.27%	1.51%	1.54%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SCHM and FLDZ in my portfolio?

SCHM and FLDZ have a correlation of 0.87, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SCHM or FLDZ?

SCHM has higher volatility (5.91%) compared to FLDZ (2.95%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SCHM dropped -42.43% vs FLDZ's -19.54%.

Which ETF is better, SCHM or FLDZ?

On 3-year performance, SCHM leads with 18.54% vs 13.86% for FLDZ. On fees, SCHM is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, FLDZ has been the lower-risk option at 2.95%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SCHM or FLDZ?

Over the 3-year period, SCHM has performed better with a 18.54% return vs 13.86%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SCHM or FLDZ?

SCHM is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.77% for FLDZ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SCHM or FLDZ?

FLDZ has the higher dividend yield at 1.43%, compared with 1.21% for SCHM.

What is the main difference between SCHM and FLDZ?

They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and RiverNorth. Their fees differ too: 0.04% for SCHM and 0.77% for FLDZ.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SCHM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.12 vs 0.98), 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.