EZM vs SCHD
WisdomTree US MidCap Fund vs Schwab US Dividend Equity ETF
Which is better, EZM or SCHD?
Mid Cap Value against Large Cap Value.
SCHD has a lower expense ratio. SCHD led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. EZM is less concentrated, with 8.5% 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 | EZM | SCHD |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.38% | 0.06%Best |
| AUM | $934M | $112.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.21% | 3.00% |
| Holdings | 508 | 103 |
| YTD Return | +10.22% | +23.46%Best |
| 1Y Return | +11.94% | +27.20%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +13.89% | +15.41%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.85% | +10.16%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.4% | 13.7%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -47.3% | -33.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $15,281 | $16,223Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 8.5%Best | 41.8% |
| Fund Family | WisdomTree Investments | Charles Schwab Asset Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Feb 23, 2007 | Oct 20, 2011 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 20, 2011 to Sep 18, 2026 (14.9 years).
EZM 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.
EZM vs SCHD Performance
WisdomTree US MidCap Fund (EZM) is an ETF from WisdomTree Investments and Schwab US Dividend Equity ETF (SCHD) is an ETF from Charles Schwab Asset Management. Over the past year EZM returned +11.94% while SCHD returned +27.20%. Year to date, EZM is up 10.22% versus a gain of 23.46% for SCHD.
Over three years, EZM compounded at +13.89% per year against +15.41% for SCHD; over five years the annualized figures are +8.85% and +10.16% respectively. Across the full 15-year window we track, SCHD has the edge at +11.25% annualized vs +10.93%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
EZM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.4% compared with 13.7% 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 -47.3% for EZM and -33.4% 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 0.86. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
EZM charges 0.38% per year while SCHD charges 0.06%. On a $10,000 position that is $38 vs $6 annually, a gap of $32 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EZM currently yields 1.21% against 3.00% for SCHD.
Holdings Overlap
5.2% of EZM's money is in holdings SCHD also owns. 3.3% of SCHD's money is in holdings EZM also owns.
EZM and SCHD share little of their money.
18 positions in common, counted across the 506 positions we hold weights for in EZM and 100 in SCHD, against full books of 508 and 103.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 81 positions for SCHD that do not appear in our book for EZM (96.7% of the fund), and 474 for EZM that do not appear in SCHD (90.8%).
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 EZM | Weight in SCHD | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| APAApa Corp | 0.94% | 0.37% | 0.57% |
| DINOHF Sinclair Corp | 0.48% | 0.38% | 0.10% |
| SWKSSkyworks Solutions Inc. | 0.41% | 0.25% | 0.16% |
| PAGPenske Automotive Group Inc | 0.54% | 0.10% | 0.44% |
| AFGAmerican Financial Group Inc/Oh | 0.31% | 0.24% | 0.07% |
| ALVAllianz Ag | 0.33% | 0.20% | 0.13% |
| BAHBooz Allen Hamilton Holding Corp. | 0.30% | 0.22% | 0.08% |
| ORIOld Republic International Corp | 0.28% | 0.23% | 0.05% |
| COLBColumbia Banking System Inc Common Stock | 0.24% | 0.21% | 0.03% |
| MMacy'S Inc. | 0.30% | 0.14% | 0.16% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of EZM 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, EZM or SCHD?
EZM has an expense ratio of 0.38% while SCHD charges 0.06%. SCHD is the cheaper option, by $32 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, EZM or SCHD?
Over the past year EZM returned +11.94% vs +27.20% for SCHD, so SCHD leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (15 years), EZM annualized +10.93% vs +11.25% for SCHD. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, EZM or SCHD?
EZM has been the more volatile fund at 18.4% annualized versus 13.7% for SCHD. Worst drawdown: EZM -47.3% vs SCHD -33.4%.
Should I hold both EZM and SCHD?
EZM and SCHD have a monthly-return correlation of 0.86, 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 EZM and SCHD?
5.2% of EZM's money is in holdings SCHD also owns. 3.3% of SCHD's is in holdings EZM also owns. They hold 18 positions in common, counted across the 506 positions we hold weights for in EZM and 100 in SCHD.
Which pays a higher dividend, EZM or SCHD?
EZM yields 1.21% while SCHD yields 3.00%, so SCHD currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is SCHD better than EZM?
SCHD has a lower expense ratio. SCHD led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. EZM is less concentrated, with 8.5% 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.