CWVX vs SCHD
Tradr 2X Long CRWV Daily ETF vs Schwab US Dividend Equity ETF
Which is better, CWVX or SCHD?
Trading-Leveraged Equity against Large Cap Value.
SCHD has a lower expense ratio. SCHD led over 1Y 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 | CWVX | SCHD |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.30% | 0.06%Best |
| AUM | $75M | $112.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 3.00% |
| Holdings | 8 | 103 |
| YTD Return | -49.59% | +23.46%Best |
| 1Y Return | -83.75% | +27.20%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +15.41% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +10.16% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 163.0% | 13.5%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -94.0% | -4.6%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.2 years | $1,278 | $12,807Best |
| Fund Family | Tradr ETFs | Charles Schwab Asset Management |
| Category | Alternative | Equity |
| Style | Trading-Leveraged Equity | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Jul 10, 2025 | Oct 20, 2011 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 11, 2025 to Sep 18, 2026 (1.2 years).
CWVX 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 1.2 years both funds cover.
CWVX vs SCHD Performance
Tradr 2X Long CRWV Daily ETF (CWVX) is an ETF from Tradr ETFs and Schwab US Dividend Equity ETF (SCHD) is an ETF from Charles Schwab Asset Management. Over the past year CWVX returned -83.75% while SCHD returned +27.20%. Year to date, CWVX is down 49.59% versus a gain of 23.46% for SCHD.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
CWVX has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 163.0% compared with 13.5% for SCHD. 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 -94.0% for CWVX and -4.6% 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 0.09. They move largely independently of each other.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CWVX charges 1.30% per year while SCHD charges 0.06%. On a $10,000 position that is $130 vs $6 annually, a gap of $124 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CWVX currently yields 0.00% against 3.00% for SCHD.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of CWVX 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, CWVX or SCHD?
CWVX has an expense ratio of 1.30% while SCHD charges 0.06%. SCHD is the cheaper option, by $124 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CWVX or SCHD?
Over the past year CWVX returned -83.75% vs +27.20% for SCHD, so SCHD leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (1 years), CWVX annualized -81.99% vs +22.90% for SCHD. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CWVX or SCHD?
CWVX has been the more volatile fund at 163.0% annualized versus 13.5% for SCHD. Worst drawdown: CWVX -94.0% vs SCHD -4.6%.
Should I hold both CWVX and SCHD?
CWVX and SCHD have a monthly-return correlation of 0.09, 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, CWVX or SCHD?
CWVX yields 0.00% while SCHD yields 3.00%, so SCHD currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is SCHD better than CWVX?
SCHD has a lower expense ratio. SCHD led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.