KONG vs SCHM
Formidable Fortress ETF vs Schwab US Mid Cap ETF
Which is better, KONG or SCHM?
SCHM has been ahead.
SCHM has a lower expense ratio. SCHM led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. SCHM is less concentrated, with 5.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 43.3%.
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 | KONG | SCHM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.89% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $23M | $14.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.34% | 1.31% |
| Holdings | 106 | 495 |
| YTD Return | +8.48% | +12.80%Best |
| 1Y Return | +9.69% | +16.12%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +9.30% | +16.61%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.61% | +6.70%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.2%Best | 18.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -20.0%Best | -26.5% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $13,772 | $13,830Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 43.3% | 5.0%Best |
| Fund Family | Formidable Funds | Charles Schwab Asset Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Blend | Mid Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jul 21, 2021 | Jan 13, 2011 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 22, 2021 to Oct 14, 2026 (5.2 years).
KONG vs SCHM 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 5.2 years both funds cover.
KONG vs SCHM Performance
Formidable Fortress ETF (KONG) is an ETF from Formidable Funds and Schwab US Mid Cap ETF (SCHM) is an ETF from Charles Schwab Asset Management. Over the past year KONG returned +9.69% while SCHM returned +16.12%. Year to date, KONG is up 8.48% versus a gain of 12.80% for SCHM.
Over three years, KONG compounded at +9.30% per year against +16.61% for SCHM; over five years the annualized figures are +6.61% and +6.70% respectively.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SCHM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.3% compared with 12.2% for KONG. 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 -20.0% for KONG and -26.5% for SCHM. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.82. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
KONG charges 0.89% per year while SCHM charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $89 vs $3 annually, a gap of $86 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, KONG currently yields 0.34% against 1.31% for SCHM.
Holdings Overlap
26.1% of KONG's money is in holdings SCHM also owns. 3.0% of SCHM's money is in holdings KONG also owns.
KONG and SCHM share little of their money.
9 positions in common, counted across the 34 positions we hold weights for in KONG and 502 in SCHM, against full books of 106 and 495.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 485 positions for SCHM that do not appear in our book for KONG (95.7% of the fund), and 25 for KONG that do not appear in SCHM (74.8%).
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 KONG | Weight in SCHM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| FFIVF5 Networks Inc. | 4.03% | 0.53% | 3.50% |
| TPLTexas Pacific Land Trust | 3.76% | 0.41% | 3.35% |
| SNASnap-On Inc. | 3.29% | 0.39% | 2.90% |
| CHEChemed Corp | 3.04% | 0.14% | 2.90% |
| UTHRUnited Therapeutics Corp | 2.38% | 0.48% | 1.90% |
| JKHYJack Henry & Associates Inc | 2.58% | 0.21% | 2.37% |
| GGGGraco, Inc. | 2.46% | 0.26% | 2.20% |
| GLPIGaming And Leisure Properties Inc | 2.43% | 0.23% | 2.20% |
| NBIXNeurocrine Biosciences Inc | 2.18% | 0.30% | 1.88% |
26.1% of KONG is already inside SCHM.
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, KONG or SCHM?
KONG has an expense ratio of 0.89% while SCHM charges 0.03%. SCHM is the cheaper option, by $86 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, KONG or SCHM?
Over the past year KONG returned +9.69% vs +16.12% for SCHM, so SCHM leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, KONG or SCHM?
SCHM has been the more volatile fund at 18.3% annualized versus 12.2% for KONG. Worst drawdown: KONG -20.0% vs SCHM -26.5%.
Should I hold both KONG and SCHM?
KONG and SCHM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.82, 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 KONG and SCHM?
26.1% of KONG's money is in holdings SCHM also owns. 3.0% of SCHM's is in holdings KONG also owns. They hold 9 positions in common, counted across the 34 positions we hold weights for in KONG and 502 in SCHM.
Which pays a higher dividend, KONG or SCHM?
KONG yields 0.34% while SCHM yields 1.31%, so SCHM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is SCHM better than KONG?
SCHM has a lower expense ratio. SCHM led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. SCHM is less concentrated, with 5.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 43.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.