IFLN vs SCHD
Invesco Bloomberg Enhanced Fallen Angels ETF vs Schwab US Dividend Equity ETF
Which is better, IFLN or SCHD?
High Yield Bond against Large Cap Value.
SCHD has a lower expense ratio. SCHD led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IFLN is less concentrated, with 23.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 41.6%.
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 | IFLN | SCHD |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.23% | 0.06%Best |
| AUM | $290M | $111.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 6.20% | 3.24% |
| Holdings | 236 | 206 |
| YTD Return | -1.56% | +32.20%Best |
| 1Y Return | -0.13% | +38.81%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +6.97% | +20.74%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +2.96% | +10.57%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 6.8%Best | 13.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -24.0%Best | -33.4% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $11,570 | $16,527Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 23.7%Best | 41.6% |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Charles Schwab Asset Management |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity |
| Style | High Yield Bond | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Nov 15, 2007 | Oct 20, 2011 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 20, 2011 to Oct 30, 2026 (15 years).
IFLN 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
IFLN vs SCHD Performance
Invesco Bloomberg Enhanced Fallen Angels ETF (IFLN) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and Schwab US Dividend Equity ETF (SCHD) is an ETF from Charles Schwab Asset Management. Over the past year IFLN returned -0.13% while SCHD returned +38.81%. Year to date, IFLN is down 1.56% versus a gain of 32.20% for SCHD.
Over three years, IFLN compounded at +6.97% per year against +20.74% for SCHD; over five years the annualized figures are +2.96% and +10.57% respectively. Across the full 15-year window we track, SCHD has the edge at +11.67% annualized vs +1.69%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SCHD has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 13.9% compared with 6.8% for IFLN. 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 -24.0% for IFLN 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 0.70. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IFLN charges 0.23% per year while SCHD charges 0.06%. On a $10,000 position that is $23 vs $6 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IFLN currently yields 6.20% against 3.24% for SCHD.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 116 holdings in IFLN and 98 in SCHD, totalling 96.0% and 99.8% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 116 positions we hold weights for in IFLN and 98 in SCHD, against full books of 236 and 206.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 97 positions for SCHD that do not appear in our book for IFLN (99.8% of the fund), and 116 for IFLN that do not appear in SCHD (96.0%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IFLN 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, IFLN or SCHD?
IFLN has an expense ratio of 0.23% while SCHD charges 0.06%. SCHD is the cheaper option, by $17 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IFLN or SCHD?
Over the past year IFLN returned -0.13% vs +38.81% for SCHD, so SCHD leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (15 years), IFLN annualized +1.69% vs +11.67% for SCHD. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IFLN or SCHD?
SCHD has been the more volatile fund at 13.9% annualized versus 6.8% for IFLN. Worst drawdown: IFLN -24.0% vs SCHD -33.4%.
Should I hold both IFLN and SCHD?
IFLN and SCHD have a monthly-return correlation of 0.70, 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, IFLN or SCHD?
IFLN yields 6.20% while SCHD yields 3.24%, so IFLN currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is SCHD better than IFLN?
SCHD has a lower expense ratio. SCHD led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IFLN is less concentrated, with 23.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 41.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.