RWJ vs SCHD
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF vs Schwab US Dividend Equity ETF
Which is better, RWJ or SCHD?
Small Cap Value against Large Cap Value.
SCHD has a lower expense ratio. RWJ led over 3Y and the full window, SCHD over 1Y and 5Y. RWJ is less concentrated, with 15.6% 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 | RWJ | SCHD |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.39% | 0.06%Best |
| AUM | $2.0B | $112.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.00% | 3.00% |
| Holdings | 606 | 103 |
| YTD Return | +17.87% | +21.99%Best |
| 1Y Return | +20.33% | +25.92%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +17.49%Best | +15.66% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.30% | +9.48%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 22.8% | 13.7%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -52.4% | -33.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $15,599 | $15,728Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 15.6%Best | 41.8% |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Charles Schwab Asset Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Small Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Feb 19, 2008 | Oct 20, 2011 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 20, 2011 to Sep 23, 2026 (14.9 years).
RWJ 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.
RWJ vs SCHD Performance
Invesco S&P SmallCap 600 Revenue ETF (RWJ) 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 RWJ returned +20.33% while SCHD returned +25.92%. Year to date, RWJ is up 17.87% versus a gain of 21.99% for SCHD.
Over three years, RWJ compounded at +17.49% per year against +15.66% for SCHD; over five years the annualized figures are +9.30% and +9.48% respectively. Across the full 15-year window we track, RWJ has the edge at +13.00% annualized vs +11.15%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
RWJ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 22.8% 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 -52.4% for RWJ 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 0.78. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
RWJ charges 0.39% per year while SCHD charges 0.06%. On a $10,000 position that is $39 vs $6 annually, a gap of $33 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, RWJ currently yields 1.00% against 3.00% for SCHD.
Holdings Overlap
3.0% of RWJ's money is in holdings SCHD also owns. 1.3% of SCHD's money is in holdings RWJ also owns.
RWJ and SCHD share little of their money.
24 positions in common, counted across the 571 positions we hold weights for in RWJ and 100 in SCHD, against full books of 606 and 103.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 76 positions for SCHD that do not appear in our book for RWJ (98.7% of the fund), and 535 for RWJ that do not appear in SCHD (94.1%).
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 RWJ | Weight in SCHD | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NSPInsperity Inc | 0.62% | 0.05% | 0.57% |
| RHIRobert Half International Inc. | 0.49% | 0.11% | 0.38% |
| FLOFlowers Foods Inc | 0.30% | 0.04% | 0.26% |
| KFYKorn Ferry | 0.21% | 0.11% | 0.10% |
| WUWestern Union Co (The) | 0.25% | 0.05% | 0.20% |
| MCMoelis & Co_None_0 | 0.10% | 0.12% | 0.02% |
| WENWendy's Co/the | 0.17% | 0.03% | 0.14% |
| APAMArtisan Partners Asset Management, Inc. | 0.10% | 0.07% | 0.03% |
| CWENClearway Energy, Inc., Class C | 0.08% | 0.09% | 0.01% |
| IPARInter Parfums Inc | 0.11% | 0.05% | 0.06% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of RWJ 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, RWJ or SCHD?
RWJ has an expense ratio of 0.39% while SCHD charges 0.06%. SCHD is the cheaper option, by $33 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, RWJ or SCHD?
Over the past year RWJ returned +20.33% vs +25.92% for SCHD, so SCHD leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (15 years), RWJ annualized +13.00% vs +11.15% for SCHD. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, RWJ or SCHD?
RWJ has been the more volatile fund at 22.8% annualized versus 13.7% for SCHD. Worst drawdown: RWJ -52.4% vs SCHD -33.4%.
Should I hold both RWJ and SCHD?
RWJ and SCHD have a monthly-return correlation of 0.78, 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 RWJ and SCHD?
3.0% of RWJ's money is in holdings SCHD also owns. 1.3% of SCHD's is in holdings RWJ also owns. They hold 24 positions in common, counted across the 571 positions we hold weights for in RWJ and 100 in SCHD.
Which pays a higher dividend, RWJ or SCHD?
RWJ yields 1.00% while SCHD yields 3.00%, so SCHD currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is SCHD better than RWJ?
SCHD has a lower expense ratio. RWJ led over 3Y and the full window, SCHD over 1Y and 5Y. RWJ is less concentrated, with 15.6% 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.