ACES vs SCHQ
ACES vs SCHQ
ALPS Clean Energy ETF vs Schwab Long-Term US Treasury ETF
Quick Verdict
SCHQ has a lower expense ratio. ACES delivered stronger 1-year returns. SCHQ offers more diversification with 98 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ACES | SCHQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.55% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $109M | $806M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.22% | 4.73% | |
| Holdings | 38 | 98 | |
| YTD Return | -4.16% | -2.55% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.72% | -1.03% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | -8.79% | -0.20% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -13.98% | -6.80% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 35.4% | 13.5% | |
| Max Drawdown | -79.0% | -46.7% | |
| Fund Family | ALPS Advisors | Charles Schwab Asset Management | |
| Category | Equity | Fixed Income | |
| Inception | Jun 27, 2018 | Oct 10, 2019 |
ACES vs SCHQ Performance
ALPS Clean Energy ETF (ACES) is a ETF from ALPS Advisors and Schwab Long-Term US Treasury ETF (SCHQ) is a ETF from Charles Schwab Asset Management. Over the past year ACES returned +21.72% while SCHQ returned -1.03%. Year to date, ACES is down 4.16% versus a loss of 2.55% for SCHQ.
Over three years, ACES compounded at -8.79% per year against -0.20% for SCHQ; over five years the annualized figures are -13.98% and -6.80% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, ACES has the edge at +3.76% annualized vs -4.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ACES has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 35.4% compared with 13.5% for SCHQ. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -79.0% for ACES and -46.7% for SCHQ. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.33. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ACES charges 0.55% per year while SCHQ charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $55 vs $3 annually, a gap of $52 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ACES currently yields 1.22% against 4.73% for SCHQ.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ACES or SCHQ?
ACES has an expense ratio of 0.55% while SCHQ charges 0.03%. SCHQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $52 per year of difference.
Which performed better, ACES or SCHQ?
Over the past year ACES returned +21.72% vs -1.03% for SCHQ, so ACES leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), ACES annualized +3.76% vs -4.41% for SCHQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, ACES or SCHQ?
ACES has been the more volatile fund at 35.4% annualized versus 13.5% for SCHQ. Worst drawdown: ACES -79.0% vs SCHQ -46.7%.
Should I hold both ACES and SCHQ?
ACES and SCHQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.33, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
Which pays a higher dividend, ACES or SCHQ?
ACES yields 1.22% while SCHQ yields 4.73%, so SCHQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.