SIZE vs. SCHM
SIZE (iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF) and SCHM (Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF) are both Mid Cap Blend Equities funds - SIZE tracks the MSCI USA Low Size Index while SCHM tracks the Dow Jones US Total Stock Market Mid-Cap. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, SIZE returned 12.00%/yr vs 11.71%/yr for SCHM. Their correlation of 0.89 suggests significant overlap in exposure. SIZE charges 0.15%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SCHM.
Performance
SIZE vs. SCHM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, SIZE achieves a 8.82% return, which is significantly lower than SCHM's 19.11% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with SIZE having a 12.00% annualized return and SCHM not far behind at 11.71%.
SIZE
- 1D
- -0.38%
- 1M
- 0.73%
- YTD
- 8.82%
- 6M
- 7.67%
- 1Y
- 17.11%
- 3Y*
- 15.52%
- 5Y*
- 7.90%
- 10Y*
- 12.00%
SCHM
- 1D
- -1.73%
- 1M
- 2.88%
- YTD
- 19.11%
- 6M
- 16.97%
- 1Y
- 31.33%
- 3Y*
- 17.85%
- 5Y*
- 8.08%
- 10Y*
- 11.71%
SIZE vs. SCHM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SIZE iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF | 8.82% | 10.51% | 14.37% | 17.78% | -15.86% | 25.05% | 16.26% | 28.97% | -6.59% | 18.76% |
SCHM Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF | 19.11% | 10.17% | 11.98% | 16.69% | -17.07% | 19.36% | 15.26% | 27.48% | -8.77% | 19.60% |
Correlation
The correlation between SIZE and SCHM is 0.91, 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 | 0.91 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.96 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.95 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 18, 2013 | 0.89 |
The correlation between SIZE and SCHM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.89 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.
SIZE vs. SCHM - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
SIZE
SCHM
Technology
Industrials
Financial Services
Consumer Cyclical
Healthcare
Utilities
Consumer Defensive
Real Estate
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Energy
Technology
SIZE
SCHM
Industrials
SIZE
SCHM
Financial Services
SIZE
SCHM
Consumer Cyclical
SIZE
SCHM
Healthcare
SIZE
SCHM
Utilities
SIZE
SCHM
Consumer Defensive
SIZE
SCHM
Real Estate
SIZE
SCHM
Basic Materials
SIZE
SCHM
Communication Services
SIZE
SCHM
Energy
SIZE
SCHM
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
SIZE vs. SCHM — Risk / Return Rank
SIZE
SCHM
SIZE vs. SCHM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF (SIZE) and Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF (SCHM). 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.
| SIZE | SCHM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | -0.61 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | -0.75 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.23 | 1.34 | -0.10 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 2.16 | 3.38 | -1.22 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 8.33 | 13.48 | -5.15 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
SIZE vs. SCHM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum SIZE drawdown since its inception was -39.15%, smaller than the maximum SCHM drawdown of -42.43%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for SIZE and SCHM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| SIZE | SCHM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -39.15% | -42.43% | +3.28% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -7.97% | -9.32% | +1.35% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -18.71% | -23.27% | +4.56% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -24.03% | -26.46% | +2.43% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -39.15% | -42.43% | +3.28% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.59% | -1.73% | +0.14% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -4.17% | -5.64% | +1.47% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.06% | 2.33% | -0.27% |
Volatility
SIZE vs. SCHM - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF (SIZE) is 3.87%, while Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF (SCHM) has a volatility of 5.75%. This indicates that SIZE experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than SCHM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| SIZE | SCHM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.87% | 5.75% | -1.88% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 9.83% | 12.61% | -2.78% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 12.98% | 16.30% | -3.32% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 17.43% | 19.67% | -2.24% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 18.70% | 20.49% | -1.79% |
SIZE vs. SCHM - Expense Ratio Comparison
SIZE has a 0.15% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHM's 0.04% 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
SIZE vs. SCHM - Dividend Comparison
SIZE's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.40%, more than SCHM's 1.22% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SCHM Schwab US Mid-Cap ETF | 1.22% | 1.46% | 1.43% | 1.50% | 1.67% | 1.13% | 1.31% | 1.48% | 1.56% | 1.27% | 1.51% | 1.54% |
SIZE iShares MSCI USA Size Factor ETF | 1.40% | 1.50% | 1.53% | 1.42% | 1.59% | 1.19% | 1.43% | 1.35% | 2.43% | 1.58% | 1.88% | 1.95% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.91, SIZE and SCHM move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.
SCHM has higher volatility (5.75%) compared to SIZE (3.87%). In terms of maximum drawdown, SIZE dropped -39.15% vs SCHM's -42.43%.
On 10-year performance, SIZE leads with 12.00% vs 11.71% for SCHM. On fees, SCHM is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, SIZE has been the lower-risk option at 3.87%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, SIZE has performed better with a 12.00% return vs 11.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
SCHM is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.15% for SIZE.
SIZE has the higher dividend yield at 1.40%, compared with 1.22% for SCHM.
SIZE tracks MSCI USA Low Size Index, while SCHM tracks Dow Jones US Total Stock Market Mid-Cap. They also come from different issuers: iShares and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.15% for SIZE and 0.04% for SCHM.
SCHM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.93 vs 1.33), 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.
Find the right allocation for SIZE and SCHM
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