HUSV vs SCHD
First Trust Horizon Managed Volatility Domestic ETF vs Schwab US Dividend Equity ETF
Which is better, HUSV or SCHD?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Value.
SCHD has a lower expense ratio. SCHD led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. HUSV is less concentrated, with 26.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 41.5%.
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 | HUSV | SCHD |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.70% | 0.06%Best |
| AUM | $57M | $112.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.27% | 3.13% |
| Holdings | 204 | 103 |
| YTD Return | +6.20% | +27.56%Best |
| 1Y Return | +3.25% | +30.29%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +9.44% | +16.37%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +5.60% | +10.23%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.2%Best | 15.2% |
| Max Drawdown | -35.7% | -33.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $13,132 | $16,274Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 26.7%Best | 41.5% |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | Charles Schwab Asset Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Aug 24, 2016 | Oct 20, 2011 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 25, 2016 to Sep 4, 2026 (10 years).
HUSV 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 10 years both funds cover.
HUSV vs SCHD Performance
First Trust Horizon Managed Volatility Domestic ETF (HUSV) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and Schwab US Dividend Equity ETF (SCHD) is an ETF from Charles Schwab Asset Management. Over the past year HUSV returned +3.25% while SCHD returned +30.29%. Year to date, HUSV is up 6.20% versus a gain of 27.56% for SCHD.
Over three years, HUSV compounded at +9.44% per year against +16.37% for SCHD; over five years the annualized figures are +5.60% and +10.23% respectively. Across the full 10-year window we track, SCHD has the edge at +11.47% annualized vs +8.21%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SCHD has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.2% compared with 13.2% for HUSV. 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 -35.7% for HUSV 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
HUSV charges 0.70% per year while SCHD charges 0.06%. On a $10,000 position that is $70 vs $6 annually, a gap of $64 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, HUSV currently yields 1.27% against 3.13% for SCHD.
Holdings Overlap
8.9% of HUSV's money is in holdings SCHD also owns. 35.3% of SCHD's money is in holdings HUSV also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
11 positions in common, counted across the 101 positions we hold weights for in HUSV and 100 in SCHD, against full books of 204 and 103.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 88 positions for SCHD that do not appear in our book for HUSV (64.6% of the fund), and 87 for HUSV that do not appear in SCHD (88.7%).
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 HUSV | Weight in SCHD | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| KOCoca Cola Co. | 2.13% | 4.20% | 2.07% |
| ABTAbbott Laboratories | 0.64% | 4.70% | 4.06% |
| PGProcter & Gamble Company | 1.05% | 3.96% | 2.91% |
| HDHome Depot Inc/The | 0.57% | 4.32% | 3.75% |
| CVXChevron Corp | 0.59% | 3.74% | 3.15% |
| PEPPepsico Inc. | 0.60% | 3.71% | 3.11% |
| VZVerizon Communic | 0.42% | 3.84% | 3.42% |
| MOAltria Group Inc | 0.74% | 2.86% | 2.12% |
| ADPAutomatic Data Processing, Inc. | 0.72% | 2.72% | 2.00% |
| CINFCincinnati Financial Corp. | 0.72% | 0.69% | 0.03% |
35.3% of SCHD is already inside HUSV.
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, HUSV or SCHD?
HUSV has an expense ratio of 0.70% while SCHD charges 0.06%. SCHD is the cheaper option, by $64 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, HUSV or SCHD?
Over the past year HUSV returned +3.25% vs +30.29% for SCHD, so SCHD leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (10 years), HUSV annualized +8.21% vs +11.47% for SCHD. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, HUSV or SCHD?
SCHD has been the more volatile fund at 15.2% annualized versus 13.2% for HUSV. Worst drawdown: HUSV -35.7% vs SCHD -33.4%.
Should I hold both HUSV and SCHD?
HUSV 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 HUSV and SCHD?
35.3% of SCHD's money is in holdings HUSV also owns. 35.3% of SCHD's is in holdings HUSV also owns. They hold 11 positions in common, counted across the 101 positions we hold weights for in HUSV and 100 in SCHD.
Which pays a higher dividend, HUSV or SCHD?
HUSV yields 1.27% while SCHD yields 3.13%, so SCHD currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is SCHD better than HUSV?
SCHD has a lower expense ratio. SCHD led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. HUSV is less concentrated, with 26.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 41.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.