SHOC vs. XLG

Last updated Jun 23, 2026

SHOC (Strive U.S. Semiconductor ETF) and XLG (Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - SHOC is a Semiconductors fund tracking the Bloomberg US Listed Semiconductors Select Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while XLG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Top 50 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 3 years, SHOC returned 56.12%/yr vs 22.12%/yr for XLG. A 0.78 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. SHOC charges 0.40%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for XLG.

Performance

SHOC vs. XLG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Strive U.S. Semiconductor ETF (SHOC) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, SHOC achieves a 81.69% return, which is significantly higher than XLG's 3.55% return.

SHOC

• 1D: 1.74%
• 1M: 15.76%
• YTD: 81.69%
• 6M: 81.47%
• 1Y: 152.44%
• 3Y*: 56.12%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

XLG

• 1D: -0.78%
• 1M: -3.59%
• YTD: 3.55%
• 6M: 3.44%
• 1Y: 23.61%
• 3Y*: 22.12%
• 5Y*: 14.84%
• 10Y*: 17.16%

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

SHOC vs. XLG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022
SHOC Strive U.S. Semiconductor ETF	81.69%	49.91%	16.74%	61.97%	-1.79%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	3.55%	19.51%	33.49%	38.16%	-2.07%

Correlation

The correlation between SHOC and XLG is 0.70, 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	0.70
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 6, 2022	0.78

The correlation between SHOC and XLG has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.78 - a consistent structural relationship.

SHOC vs. XLG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	SHOC	XLG
Technology	100.0%	46.8%
Basic Materials	-	0.6%
Communication Services	-	16.0%
Consumer Cyclical	-	11.2%
Consumer Defensive	-	5.2%
Energy	-	2.4%
Financial Services	-	9.0%
Healthcare	-	7.0%
Industrials	-	1.9%
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

SHOC vs. XLG — Risk / Return Rank

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

SHOC

SHOC Risk / Return Rank: 95
SHOC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 97
SHOC Sortino Ratio Rank: 93
SHOC Omega Ratio Rank: 93
SHOC Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
SHOC Martin Ratio Rank: 96

XLG

XLG Risk / Return Rank: 47
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 49
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 50
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 44

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.

SHOC vs. XLG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Strive U.S. Semiconductor ETF (SHOC) and Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG). 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.

	SHOC	XLG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	4.40	1.71	+2.69
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	4.38	2.33	+2.05
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.61	1.31	+0.30
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	10.51	1.91	+8.60
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	37.16	6.89	+30.28

SHOC vs. XLG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current SHOC Sharpe Ratio is 4.40, which is higher than the XLG Sharpe Ratio of 1.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of SHOC and XLG, 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

SHOC vs. XLG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum SHOC drawdown since its inception was -37.54%, smaller than the maximum XLG drawdown of -52.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SHOC and XLG.

Drawdown Indicators

	SHOC	XLG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-37.54%	-52.39%	+14.85%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.59%	-12.41%	-2.18%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-37.54%	-20.70%	-16.84%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-28.02%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-30.46%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	0.00%	-5.13%	+5.13%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.44%	-7.63%	+0.19%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.12%	3.44%	+0.68%

Volatility

SHOC vs. XLG - Volatility Comparison

Strive U.S. Semiconductor ETF (SHOC) has a higher volatility of 17.00% compared to Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) at 4.74%. This indicates that SHOC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than XLG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	SHOC	XLG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	17.00%	4.74%	+12.26%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	28.12%	10.60%	+17.52%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	34.93%	13.86%	+21.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	35.86%	18.77%	+17.09%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	35.86%	18.89%	+16.97%

SHOC vs. XLG - Expense Ratio Comparison

SHOC has a 0.40% expense ratio, which is higher than XLG's 0.20% expense ratio.

Dividends

SHOC vs. XLG - Dividend Comparison

SHOC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.13%, less than XLG's 0.82% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
SHOC Strive U.S. Semiconductor ETF	0.13%	0.23%	0.35%	0.65%	0.24%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	0.65%	0.64%	0.72%	0.97%	1.34%	0.94%	1.25%	1.58%	2.00%	1.85%	2.00%	2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both SHOC and XLG in my portfolio?

SHOC and XLG have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, SHOC or XLG?

SHOC has higher volatility (17.00%) compared to XLG (4.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SHOC dropped -37.54% vs XLG's -52.39%.

Which ETF is better, SHOC or XLG?

On 3-year performance, SHOC leads with 56.12% vs 22.12% for XLG. On fees, XLG is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, XLG has been the lower-risk option at 4.74%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, SHOC or XLG?

Over the 3-year period, SHOC has performed better with a 56.12% return vs 22.12%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, SHOC or XLG?

XLG is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.40% for SHOC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, SHOC or XLG?

XLG has the higher dividend yield at 0.82%, compared with 0.13% for SHOC.

What is the main difference between SHOC and XLG?

SHOC is categorized as Semiconductors, while XLG is S&P 500. SHOC tracks Bloomberg US Listed Semiconductors Select Index - Benchmark TR Gross, while XLG tracks S&P 500 Top 50 Index. They also come from different issuers: Strive and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.40% for SHOC and 0.20% for XLG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

SHOC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (4.40 vs 1.71), 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.