ACVF vs SCHD
American Conservative Values ETF vs Schwab US Dividend Equity ETF
Which is better, ACVF or SCHD?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Value.
SCHD has a lower expense ratio. ACVF led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, SCHD over 1Y. ACVF is less concentrated, with 28.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 41.8%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ACVF | SCHD |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.75% | 0.06%Best |
| AUM | $154M | $112.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.51% | 3.00% |
| Holdings | 391 | 103 |
| YTD Return | +10.15% | +24.23%Best |
| 1Y Return | +11.87% | +27.90%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +17.40%Best | +15.55% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.37%Best | +9.97% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.8%Best | 15.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -24.4% | -16.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,133Best | $16,083 |
| Top 10 Weight | 28.7%Best | 41.8% |
| Fund Family | ACV ETFs | Charles Schwab Asset Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Oct 28, 2020 | Oct 20, 2011 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 29, 2020 to Sep 17, 2026 (5.9 years).
ACVF vs SCHD growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 5.9 years both funds cover.
ACVF vs SCHD Performance
American Conservative Values ETF (ACVF) is an ETF from ACV ETFs and Schwab US Dividend Equity ETF (SCHD) is an ETF from Charles Schwab Asset Management. Over the past year ACVF returned +11.87% while SCHD returned +27.90%. Year to date, ACVF is up 10.15% versus a gain of 24.23% for SCHD.
Over three years, ACVF compounded at +17.40% per year against +15.55% for SCHD; over five years the annualized figures are +11.37% and +9.97% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, ACVF has the edge at +15.27% annualized vs +14.52%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SCHD has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.3% compared with 14.8% for ACVF. 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 -24.4% for ACVF and -16.9% for SCHD. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.77. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ACVF charges 0.75% per year while SCHD charges 0.06%. On a $10,000 position that is $75 vs $6 annually, a gap of $69 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ACVF currently yields 0.51% against 3.00% for SCHD.
Holdings Overlap
8.9% of ACVF's money is in holdings SCHD also owns. 73.2% of SCHD's money is in holdings ACVF also owns.
Most of SCHD is already inside ACVF. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
36 positions in common, counted across the 387 positions we hold weights for in ACVF and 100 in SCHD, against full books of 391 and 103.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 63 positions for SCHD that do not appear in our book for ACVF (26.8% of the fund), and 336 for ACVF that do not appear in SCHD (90.3%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in ACVF | Weight in SCHD | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MRKMerck & Company Inc | 0.83% | 4.77% | 3.94% |
| ABTAbbott Laboratories | 0.40% | 4.69% | 4.29% |
| HDHome Depot Inc/The | 1.13% | 3.88% | 2.75% |
| AMGNAmgen Inc. | 0.27% | 4.70% | 4.43% |
| CVXChevron Corp | 0.61% | 4.02% | 3.41% |
| PGProcter & Gamble Company | 0.59% | 3.83% | 3.24% |
| PEPPepsico Inc. | 0.64% | 3.64% | 3.00% |
| COPConocophillips Common Stock USD 0.01 | 0.22% | 3.94% | 3.72% |
| TXNTexas Instrument Inc | 0.58% | 3.13% | 2.55% |
| BMYBristol-Myers Squibb Co. | 0.34% | 3.33% | 2.99% |
73.2% of SCHD is already inside ACVF.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ACVF or SCHD?
ACVF has an expense ratio of 0.75% while SCHD charges 0.06%. SCHD is the cheaper option, by $69 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, ACVF or SCHD?
Over the past year ACVF returned +11.87% vs +27.90% for SCHD, so SCHD leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), ACVF annualized +15.27% vs +14.52% for SCHD. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, ACVF or SCHD?
SCHD has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 14.8% for ACVF. Worst drawdown: ACVF -24.4% vs SCHD -16.9%.
Should I hold both ACVF and SCHD?
ACVF and SCHD have a monthly-return correlation of 0.77, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between ACVF and SCHD?
73.2% of SCHD's money is in holdings ACVF also owns. 73.2% of SCHD's is in holdings ACVF also owns. They hold 36 positions in common, counted across the 387 positions we hold weights for in ACVF and 100 in SCHD.
Which pays a higher dividend, ACVF or SCHD?
ACVF yields 0.51% while SCHD yields 3.00%, so SCHD currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is SCHD better than ACVF?
SCHD has a lower expense ratio. ACVF led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, SCHD over 1Y. ACVF is less concentrated, with 28.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 41.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.