SCHO vs. PYLD

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

SCHO (Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF) and PYLD (PIMCO Multisector Bond Active Exchange-Traded Fund) are both exchange-traded funds - SCHO is a Government Bonds fund tracking the Bloomberg U.S. Treasury 1-3 Year Index, while PYLD is a Multisector Bonds fund actively managed by PIMCO. SCHO is passively managed, while PYLD is actively managed. Over the past year, SCHO returned 3.35% vs 6.95% for PYLD. A 0.67 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SCHO charges 0.03%/yr vs 0.55%/yr for PYLD.

Performance

SCHO vs. PYLD - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF (SCHO) and PIMCO Multisector Bond Active Exchange-Traded Fund (PYLD). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SCHO achieves a 0.54% return, which is significantly lower than PYLD's 1.33% return.

SCHO

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: 0.18%
• YTD: 0.54%
• 6M: 0.82%
• 1Y: 3.35%
• 3Y*: 4.25%
• 5Y*: 1.82%
• 10Y*: 1.71%

PYLD

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: 0.80%
• YTD: 1.33%
• 6M: 1.94%
• 1Y: 6.95%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

SCHO vs. PYLD - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
SCHO Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF	0.54%	5.49%	3.65%	3.01%
PYLD PIMCO Multisector Bond Active Exchange-Traded Fund	1.33%	9.57%	7.69%	5.46%

Correlation

The correlation between SCHO and PYLD is 0.61, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.61
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 22, 2023	0.67

The correlation between SCHO and PYLD has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.61 to 0.67 - a consistent structural relationship.

SCHO vs. PYLD - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SCHO	PYLD
Communication Services	1.1%	-
Technology	1.1%	-
Financial Services	0.2%	-
Basic Materials	-	-
Consumer Cyclical	-	-
Consumer Defensive	-	-
Energy	-	100.0%
Healthcare	-	-
Industrials	-	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

SCHO vs. PYLD — Risk / Return Rank

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

SCHO

SCHO Risk / Return Rank: 88
SCHO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 87
SCHO Sortino Ratio Rank: 92
SCHO Omega Ratio Rank: 89
SCHO Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
SCHO Martin Ratio Rank: 88

PYLD

PYLD Risk / Return Rank: 73
PYLD Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
PYLD Sortino Ratio Rank: 86
PYLD Omega Ratio Rank: 86
PYLD Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
PYLD Martin Ratio Rank: 62

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.

SCHO vs. PYLD - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF (SCHO) and PIMCO Multisector Bond Active Exchange-Traded Fund (PYLD). 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.

	SCHO	PYLD	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.46	2.30	+0.16
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.02	3.38	+0.63
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.50	1.46	+0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.91	2.15	+1.76
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.48	9.76	+6.72

SCHO vs. PYLD - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SCHO Sharpe Ratio is 2.46, which is comparable to the PYLD Sharpe Ratio of 2.30. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SCHO and PYLD, 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

SCHO vs. PYLD - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SCHO drawdown since its inception was -5.69%, which is greater than PYLD's maximum drawdown of -4.52%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SCHO and PYLD.

Drawdown Indicators

	SCHO	PYLD	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-5.69%	-4.52%	-1.17%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.86%	-3.25%	+2.39%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-0.98%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-5.69%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-5.69%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.14%	-0.06%	-0.08%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.61%	-0.65%	+0.04%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.20%	0.71%	-0.51%

Volatility

SCHO vs. PYLD - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF (SCHO) is 0.43%, while PIMCO Multisector Bond Active Exchange-Traded Fund (PYLD) has a volatility of 1.24%. This indicates that SCHO experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than PYLD based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SCHO	PYLD	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.43%	1.24%	-0.81%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.93%	2.54%	-1.61%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.37%	3.04%	-1.67%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	1.98%	3.98%	-2.00%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	1.56%	3.98%	-2.42%

SCHO vs. PYLD - Expense Ratio Comparison

SCHO has a 0.03% expense ratio, which is lower than PYLD's 0.55% expense ratio.

Dividends

SCHO vs. PYLD - Dividend Comparison

SCHO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.90%, less than PYLD's 6.27% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
PYLD PIMCO Multisector Bond Active Exchange-Traded Fund	6.27%	6.21%	6.40%	2.72%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
SCHO Schwab Short-Term U.S. Treasury ETF	3.90%	4.06%	4.29%	3.76%	1.34%	0.41%	1.27%	2.27%	1.60%	1.12%	0.82%	0.68%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SCHO and PYLD in my portfolio?

SCHO and PYLD have a correlation of 0.61, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SCHO or PYLD?

PYLD has higher volatility (1.24%) compared to SCHO (0.43%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SCHO dropped -5.69% vs PYLD's -4.52%.

Which ETF is better, SCHO or PYLD?

On 1-year performance, PYLD leads with 6.95% vs 3.35% for SCHO. On fees, SCHO is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, SCHO has been the lower-risk option at 0.43%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SCHO or PYLD?

Over the 1-year period, PYLD has performed better with a 6.95% return vs 3.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SCHO or PYLD?

SCHO is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.55% for PYLD.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SCHO or PYLD?

PYLD has the higher dividend yield at 6.27%, compared with 3.90% for SCHO.

What is the main difference between SCHO and PYLD?

SCHO is categorized as Government Bonds, while PYLD is Multisector Bonds. They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and PIMCO. Their fees differ too: 0.03% for SCHO and 0.55% for PYLD.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SCHO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.46 vs 2.30), 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.