BBEM vs SCHQ
JPMorgan BetaBuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF vs Schwab Long-Term US Treasury ETF
Quick Verdict
SCHQ has a lower expense ratio. BBEM delivered stronger 1-year returns. BBEM offers more diversification with 889 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BBEM | SCHQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.15% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $748M | $806M | |
| Dividend Yield | 2.52% | 4.73% | |
| Holdings | 1,132 | 98 | |
| YTD Return | +15.82% | -2.55% | |
| 1Y Return | +32.69% | -1.03% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +19.42% | -0.20% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | -6.80% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 13.5% | |
| Max Drawdown | -17.4% | -46.7% | |
| Fund Family | J.P. Morgan Asset Management | Charles Schwab Asset Management | |
| Category | Equity | Fixed Income | |
| Inception | May 10, 2023 | Oct 10, 2019 |
BBEM vs SCHQ Performance
JPMorgan BetaBuilders Emerging Markets Equity ETF (BBEM) is a ETF from J.P. Morgan Asset Management and Schwab Long-Term US Treasury ETF (SCHQ) is a ETF from Charles Schwab Asset Management. Over the past year BBEM returned +32.69% while SCHQ returned -1.03%. Year to date, BBEM is up 15.82% versus a loss of 2.55% for SCHQ.
Over three years, BBEM compounded at +19.42% per year against -0.20% for SCHQ. Across the full 3-year window we track, BBEM has the edge at +19.55% annualized vs -4.41%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BBEM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% 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 -17.4% for BBEM 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 0.52. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BBEM charges 0.15% per year while SCHQ charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $15 vs $3 annually, a gap of $12 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BBEM currently yields 2.52% against 4.73% for SCHQ.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BBEM or SCHQ?
BBEM has an expense ratio of 0.15% while SCHQ charges 0.03%. SCHQ is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $12 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BBEM or SCHQ?
Over the past year BBEM returned +32.69% vs -1.03% for SCHQ, so BBEM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (3 years), BBEM annualized +19.55% vs -4.41% for SCHQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BBEM or SCHQ?
BBEM has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 13.5% for SCHQ. Worst drawdown: BBEM -17.4% vs SCHQ -46.7%.
Should I hold both BBEM and SCHQ?
BBEM and SCHQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.52, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
Which pays a higher dividend, BBEM or SCHQ?
BBEM yields 2.52% 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.