XCEM vs. SCHG

Last updated Jun 9, 2026

XCEM (Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF) and SCHG (Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XCEM is a Emerging Markets Equities fund tracking the MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index, while SCHG is a Large Cap Growth Equities fund tracking the Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, XCEM returned 12.13%/yr vs 18.53%/yr for SCHG. A 0.58 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. XCEM charges 0.16%/yr vs 0.04%/yr for SCHG.

Performance

XCEM vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XCEM achieves a 30.29% return, which is significantly higher than SCHG's 3.75% return. Over the past 10 years, XCEM has underperformed SCHG with an annualized return of 12.13%, while SCHG has yielded a comparatively higher 18.53% annualized return.

XCEM

• 1D: 2.17%
• 1M: -1.32%
• YTD: 30.29%
• 6M: 35.41%
• 1Y: 58.25%
• 3Y*: 23.31%
• 5Y*: 10.94%
• 10Y*: 12.13%

SCHG

• 1D: 0.15%
• 1M: -0.94%
• YTD: 3.75%
• 6M: 2.93%
• 1Y: 20.82%
• 3Y*: 24.03%
• 5Y*: 14.90%
• 10Y*: 18.53%

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

XCEM vs. SCHG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF	30.29%	34.05%	0.42%	19.96%	-17.59%	7.87%	9.47%	19.74%	-11.75%	34.78%
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF	3.75%	17.50%	34.95%	50.10%	-31.80%	28.11%	39.14%	36.02%	-1.36%	28.05%

Correlation

The correlation between XCEM and SCHG 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	0.66
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.66
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.59
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 3, 2015	0.58

The correlation between XCEM and SCHG shifts across timeframes, from 0.58 (all time) to 0.70 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

XCEM vs. SCHG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XCEM	SCHG
Technology	37.1%	46.3%
Financial Services	22.8%	6.7%
Industrials	9.7%	5.8%
Basic Materials	6.4%	1.4%
Consumer Cyclical	6.3%	12.7%
Communication Services	4.2%	16.0%
Energy	3.8%	0.8%
Consumer Defensive	3.0%	1.7%
Healthcare	2.9%	7.7%
Utilities	1.9%	0.4%
Real Estate	1.8%	0.5%

Return for Risk

XCEM vs. SCHG — Risk / Return Rank

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

XCEM

XCEM Risk / Return Rank: 85
XCEM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
XCEM Sortino Ratio Rank: 81
XCEM Omega Ratio Rank: 86
XCEM Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
XCEM Martin Ratio Rank: 85

SCHG

SCHG Risk / Return Rank: 36
SCHG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 42
SCHG Sortino Ratio Rank: 39
SCHG Omega Ratio Rank: 40
SCHG Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
SCHG Martin Ratio Rank: 32

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.

XCEM vs. SCHG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). 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.

	XCEM	SCHG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.64	1.33	+1.31
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.26	1.82	+1.44
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.48	1.24	+0.25
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.05	1.27	+2.77
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	16.03	4.25	+11.78
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

XCEM vs. SCHG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XCEM Sharpe Ratio is 2.64, which is higher than the SCHG Sharpe Ratio of 1.33. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XCEM and SCHG, 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

	XCEM	SCHG	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.64	1.33	+1.31
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.61	0.67	-0.06
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.61	0.86	-0.25
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.60	0.83	-0.24

Drawdowns

XCEM vs. SCHG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XCEM drawdown since its inception was -41.24%, which is greater than SCHG's maximum drawdown of -34.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCEM and SCHG.

Drawdown Indicators

	XCEM	SCHG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-41.24%	-34.59%	-6.65%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-14.46%	-16.41%	+1.95%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.92%	-23.39%	+4.47%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.65%	-34.59%	+4.94%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-41.24%	-34.59%	-6.65%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.98%	-4.25%	-2.73%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.59%	-5.20%	-3.39%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.64%	4.91%	-1.27%

Volatility

XCEM vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison

Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) has a higher volatility of 11.63% compared to Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) at 4.52%. This indicates that XCEM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SCHG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XCEM	SCHG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	11.63%	4.52%	+7.11%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.28%	12.02%	+8.26%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	22.22%	15.77%	+6.45%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.05%	22.31%	-4.26%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	19.83%	21.58%	-1.75%

XCEM vs. SCHG - Expense Ratio Comparison

XCEM has a 0.16% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHG'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

XCEM vs. SCHG - Dividend Comparison

XCEM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.50%, more than SCHG's 0.37% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF	0.37%	0.36%	0.39%	0.46%	0.55%	0.42%	0.52%	0.82%	1.27%	1.01%	1.04%	1.22%
XCEM Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF	2.50%	3.25%	2.76%	1.22%	2.42%	1.94%	1.63%	2.11%	2.70%	9.56%	1.24%	2.63%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XCEM and SCHG in my portfolio?

XCEM and SCHG 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, XCEM or SCHG?

XCEM has higher volatility (11.63%) compared to SCHG (4.52%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XCEM dropped -41.24% vs SCHG's -34.59%.

Which ETF is better, XCEM or SCHG?

On 10-year performance, SCHG leads with 18.53% vs 12.13% for XCEM. On fees, SCHG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, SCHG has been the lower-risk option at 4.52%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XCEM or SCHG?

Over the 10-year period, SCHG has performed better with a 18.53% return vs 12.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XCEM or SCHG?

SCHG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.16% for XCEM.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XCEM or SCHG?

XCEM has the higher dividend yield at 2.50%, compared with 0.37% for SCHG.

What is the main difference between XCEM and SCHG?

XCEM is categorized as Emerging Markets Equities, while SCHG is Large Cap Growth Equities. XCEM tracks MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index, while SCHG tracks Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index. They also come from different issuers: Ameriprise Financial and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.16% for XCEM and 0.04% for SCHG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XCEM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.64 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.