BZQ vs SCHD
ProShares UltraShort MSCI Brazil Capped vs Schwab US Dividend Equity ETF
Which is better, BZQ or SCHD?
Trading-Inverse Equity against Large Cap Value.
SCHD has a lower expense ratio. SCHD led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window.
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 | BZQ | SCHD |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.95% | 0.06%Best |
| AUM | $2M | $112.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 6.73% | 3.00% |
| Holdings | 5 | 103 |
| YTD Return | -37.77% | +24.59%Best |
| 1Y Return | -50.99% | +28.14%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | -28.31% | +15.58%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -29.83% | +9.90%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 57.7% | 13.6%Best |
| Max Drawdown | - | -33.4% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $1,701 | $16,032Best |
| Fund Family | ProShares | Charles Schwab Asset Management |
| Category | Alternative | Equity |
| Style | Trading-Inverse Equity | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Jun 16, 2009 | Oct 20, 2011 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 20, 2011 to Sep 10, 2026 (14.9 years).
BZQ 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 14.9 years both funds cover.
BZQ vs SCHD Performance
ProShares UltraShort MSCI Brazil Capped (BZQ) is an ETF from ProShares and Schwab US Dividend Equity ETF (SCHD) is an ETF from Charles Schwab Asset Management. Over the past year BZQ returned -50.99% while SCHD returned +28.14%. Year to date, BZQ is down 37.77% versus a gain of 24.59% for SCHD.
Over three years, BZQ compounded at -28.31% per year against +15.58% for SCHD; over five years the annualized figures are -29.83% and +9.90% respectively. Across the full 15-year window we track, SCHD has the edge at +11.34% annualized vs -29.10%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BZQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 57.7% compared with 13.6% for SCHD. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at -0.43. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BZQ charges 0.95% per year while SCHD charges 0.06%. On a $10,000 position that is $95 vs $6 annually, a gap of $89 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BZQ currently yields 6.73% against 3.00% for SCHD.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of BZQ and SCHD you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BZQ or SCHD?
BZQ has an expense ratio of 0.95% while SCHD charges 0.06%. SCHD is the cheaper option, by $89 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, BZQ or SCHD?
Over the past year BZQ returned -50.99% vs +28.14% for SCHD, so SCHD leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (15 years), BZQ annualized -29.10% vs +11.34% for SCHD. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, BZQ or SCHD?
BZQ has been the more volatile fund at 57.7% annualized versus 13.6% for SCHD.
Should I hold both BZQ and SCHD?
BZQ and SCHD have a monthly-return correlation of -0.43, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, BZQ or SCHD?
BZQ yields 6.73% while SCHD yields 3.00%, so BZQ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is SCHD better than BZQ?
SCHD has a lower expense ratio. SCHD led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.