SCUS vs. TBLL

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

SCUS (Schwab Ultra-Short Income ETF) and TBLL (Invesco Short Term Treasury ETF) are both Ultrashort Bond funds. SCUS is actively managed, while TBLL is passively managed. Over the past year, SCUS returned 4.17% vs 3.93% for TBLL. At a 0.23 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. SCUS charges 0.14%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for TBLL.

Performance

SCUS vs. TBLL - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab Ultra-Short Income ETF (SCUS) and Invesco Short Term Treasury ETF (TBLL). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

As of year-to-date, both investments have demonstrated similar returns, with SCUS at 1.43% and TBLL at 1.43%.

SCUS

• 1D: -0.02%
• 1M: 0.37%
• YTD: 1.43%
• 6M: 1.78%
• 1Y: 4.17%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

TBLL

• 1D: 0.01%
• 1M: 0.29%
• YTD: 1.43%
• 6M: 1.74%
• 1Y: 3.93%
• 3Y*: 4.66%
• 5Y*: 3.35%
• 10Y*: —

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

SCUS vs. TBLL - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
SCUS Schwab Ultra-Short Income ETF	1.43%	4.51%	2.06%
TBLL Invesco Short Term Treasury ETF	1.43%	4.21%	1.90%

Correlation

The correlation between SCUS and TBLL is 0.31, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.31
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 14, 2024	0.23

SCUS vs. TBLL - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SCUS	TBLL
Financial Services	26.9%	64.0%
Technology	6.1%	-
Real Estate	3.7%	-
Healthcare	3.0%	-
Industrials	2.3%	-
Energy	1.9%	-
Communication Services	1.5%	-
Utilities	1.1%	-
Consumer Defensive	0.9%	-
Consumer Cyclical	0.5%	-
Basic Materials	-	-

Return for Risk

SCUS vs. TBLL — Risk / Return Rank

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

SCUS

SCUS Risk / Return Rank: 99
SCUS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 98
SCUS Sortino Ratio Rank: 99
SCUS Omega Ratio Rank: 99
SCUS Calmar Ratio Rank: 99
SCUS Martin Ratio Rank: 99

TBLL

TBLL Risk / Return Rank: 100
TBLL Sharpe Ratio Rank: 100
TBLL Sortino Ratio Rank: 100
TBLL Omega Ratio Rank: 100
TBLL Calmar Ratio Rank: 100
TBLL Martin Ratio Rank: 100

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.

SCUS vs. TBLL - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab Ultra-Short Income ETF (SCUS) and Invesco Short Term Treasury ETF (TBLL). 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.

	SCUS	TBLL	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	6.28	20.94	-14.66
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	12.57	218.31	-205.74
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	2.76	102.92	-100.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	25.13	416.84	-391.71
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	111.55	3,533.11	-3,421.56
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

SCUS vs. TBLL - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SCUS Sharpe Ratio is 6.28, which is lower than the TBLL Sharpe Ratio of 20.94. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SCUS and TBLL, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	SCUS	TBLL	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	6.28	20.94	-14.66
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	7.53	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	6.42	4.26	+2.16

Drawdowns

SCUS vs. TBLL - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SCUS drawdown since its inception was -0.17%, smaller than the maximum TBLL drawdown of -0.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SCUS and TBLL.

Drawdown Indicators

	SCUS	TBLL	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-0.17%	-0.63%	+0.46%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-0.17%	-0.01%	-0.16%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-0.36%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-0.36%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.02%	0.00%	-0.02%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-0.02%	-0.14%	+0.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	0.04%	0.00%	+0.04%

Volatility

SCUS vs. TBLL - Volatility Comparison

Schwab Ultra-Short Income ETF (SCUS) has a higher volatility of 0.20% compared to Invesco Short Term Treasury ETF (TBLL) at 0.05%. This indicates that SCUS's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TBLL based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SCUS	TBLL	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	0.20%	0.05%	+0.15%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	0.47%	0.12%	+0.35%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.67%	0.19%	+0.48%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	0.70%	0.45%	+0.25%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	0.70%	0.56%	+0.14%

SCUS vs. TBLL - Expense Ratio Comparison

SCUS has a 0.14% expense ratio, which is higher than TBLL's 0.08% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

SCUS vs. TBLL - Dividend Comparison

SCUS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.91%, more than TBLL's 3.81% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
SCUS Schwab Ultra-Short Income ETF	3.91%	4.17%	1.62%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
TBLL Invesco Short Term Treasury ETF	3.81%	4.08%	4.99%	4.63%	1.37%	0.03%	0.80%	2.08%	1.69%	0.71%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SCUS and TBLL in my portfolio?

SCUS and TBLL have a correlation of 0.31, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SCUS or TBLL?

SCUS has higher volatility (0.20%) compared to TBLL (0.05%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SCUS dropped -0.17% vs TBLL's -0.63%.

Which ETF is better, SCUS or TBLL?

On 1-year performance, SCUS leads with 4.17% vs 3.93% for TBLL. On fees, TBLL is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, TBLL has been the lower-risk option at 0.05%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SCUS or TBLL?

Over the 1-year period, SCUS has performed better with a 4.17% return vs 3.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SCUS or TBLL?

TBLL is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.14% for SCUS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SCUS or TBLL?

SCUS has the higher dividend yield at 3.91%, compared with 3.81% for TBLL.

What is the main difference between SCUS and TBLL?

They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.14% for SCUS and 0.08% for TBLL.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TBLL currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (20.94 vs 6.28), 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.