XCHG vs. SPTM
XCHG (AB US Equity ETF) and SPTM (SPDR Portfolio S&P 1500 Composite Stock Market ETF) are both Large Cap Blend Equities funds. XCHG is actively managed, while SPTM is passively managed. Their correlation of 0.95 means they have usually moved in the same direction. XCHG charges 0.50%/yr vs 0.03%/yr for SPTM.
Performance
XCHG vs. SPTM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, XCHG achieves a 8.51% return, which is significantly lower than SPTM's 10.61% return.
XCHG
- 1D
- 1.09%
- 1M
- 1.45%
- 6M
- 7.39%
- YTD
- 8.51%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
- ALL TIME*
- —
SPTM
- 1D
- 0.62%
- 1M
- 0.21%
- 6M
- 8.81%
- YTD
- 10.61%
- 1Y
- 21.87%
- 3Y*
- 18.90%
- 5Y*
- 12.48%
- 10Y*
- 14.86%
- ALL TIME*
- 8.78%
Liquidity Comparison
| Position | Avg. Volume Value (2W) | Avg. Volume Value (1M) | Avg. Volume Value (3M) |
|---|---|---|---|
| $40.04M | $39.69M | $45.49M | |
XCHG AB US Equity ETF | $55.08K | $59.91K | $74.54K |
XCHG vs. SPTM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
XCHG AB US Equity ETF | 8.51% | 0.38% |
SPTM SPDR Portfolio S&P 1500 Composite Stock Market ETF | 10.61% | 0.18% |
Correlation
The correlation between XCHG and SPTM is 0.95, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 15, 2025 | 0.95 |
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
XCHG vs. SPTM — Risk / Return Rank
XCHG
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
SPTM
XCHG vs. SPTM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AB US Equity ETF (XCHG) and SPDR Portfolio S&P 1500 Composite Stock Market ETF (SPTM). 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.
| XCHG | SPTM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.28 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 2.31 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 10.07 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
XCHG vs. SPTM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum XCHG drawdown since its inception was -9.66%, smaller than the maximum SPTM drawdown of -54.80%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XCHG and SPTM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| XCHG | SPTM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -9.66% | -54.80% | +45.14% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -8.68% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -18.87% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -24.14% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -34.66% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.30% | -1.11% | +0.81% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -1.77% | -9.00% | +7.23% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 1.99% | — |
Volatility
XCHG vs. SPTM - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| XCHG | SPTM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 3.50% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 10.02% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 13.06% | 12.81% | +0.25% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 13.06% | 16.97% | -3.91% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 13.06% | 18.03% | -4.97% |
XCHG vs. SPTM - Expense Ratio Comparison
XCHG has a 0.50% expense ratio, which is higher than SPTM's 0.03% expense ratio.
Dividends
XCHG vs. SPTM - Dividend Comparison
XCHG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.37%, less than SPTM's 1.06% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SPTM SPDR Portfolio S&P 1500 Composite Stock Market ETF | 1.06% | 1.13% | 1.28% | 1.44% | 1.69% | 1.25% | 1.56% | 1.72% | 1.90% | 1.66% | 1.91% | 1.92% |
XCHG AB US Equity ETF | 0.37% | 0.05% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
With a correlation of 0.95, XCHG and SPTM 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.
On fees, SPTM is cheaper at 0.03% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
SPTM is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for XCHG.
SPTM has the higher dividend yield at 1.06%, compared with 0.37% for XCHG.
They also come from different issuers: AllianceBernstein and State Street. Their fees differ too: 0.50% for XCHG and 0.03% for SPTM.
Find the right allocation for XCHG and SPTM
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