SCHX vs WBIL
Schwab US Large-Cap ETF vs WBI BullBear Quality 3000 ETF
Which is better, SCHX or WBIL?
SCHX has been ahead.
SCHX has a lower expense ratio. SCHX led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. WBIL is less concentrated, with 23.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 36.9%.
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 | SCHX | WBIL |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 1.55% |
| AUM | $75.3B | $30M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.04% | 0.04% |
| Holdings | 752 | 142 |
| YTD Return | +13.08% | +14.67%Best |
| 1Y Return | +16.62%Best | +14.68% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.27%Best | +10.76% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.56%Best | +6.30% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.9% | 11.9%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -34.3% | -25.3%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,068Best | $13,573 |
| Top 10 Weight | 36.9% | 23.0%Best |
| Fund Family | Charles Schwab Asset Management | WBI Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Nov 3, 2009 | Aug 25, 2014 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 27, 2014 to Oct 14, 2026 (12.1 years).
SCHX vs WBIL 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 12.1 years both funds cover.
SCHX vs WBIL Performance
Schwab US Large-Cap ETF (SCHX) is an ETF from Charles Schwab Asset Management and WBI BullBear Quality 3000 ETF (WBIL) is an ETF from WBI Investments. Over the past year SCHX returned +16.62% while WBIL returned +14.68%. Year to date, SCHX is up 13.08% versus a gain of 14.67% for WBIL.
Over three years, SCHX compounded at +22.27% per year against +10.76% for WBIL; over five years the annualized figures are +12.56% and +6.30% respectively. Across the full 12-year window we track, SCHX has the edge at +12.31% annualized vs +4.57%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SCHX has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.9% compared with 11.9% for WBIL. 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 -34.3% for SCHX and -25.3% for WBIL. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.76. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
SCHX charges 0.03% per year while WBIL charges 1.55%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $155 annually, a gap of $152 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, SCHX currently yields 1.04% against 0.04% for WBIL.
Holdings Overlap
17.6% of SCHX's money is in holdings WBIL also owns. 92.7% of WBIL's money is in holdings SCHX also owns.
Most of WBIL is already inside SCHX. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
60 positions in common, counted across the 752 positions we hold weights for in SCHX and 64 in WBIL, against full books of 752 and 142.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 3 positions for WBIL that do not appear in our book for SCHX (4.7% of the fund), and 669 for SCHX that do not appear in WBIL (81.6%).
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 SCHX | Weight in WBIL | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.72% | 2.38% | 0.66% |
| METAMeta Platform Inc | 2.28% | 1.65% | 0.63% |
| BRK.BBrk/B | 1.33% | 1.92% | 0.59% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 1.47% | 1.69% | 0.22% |
| VVisa Inc-class A Shares | 0.87% | 1.94% | 1.07% |
| DELLDell Technologies Inc. | 0.24% | 2.51% | 2.27% |
| AMGNAmgen Inc. | 0.31% | 2.15% | 1.84% |
| ANETArista Networks Inc Common Stock | 0.31% | 2.10% | 1.79% |
| SMCISuper Micro Computer Inc Common Stock USD.001 | 0.03% | 2.37% | 2.34% |
| APHAmphenol Corp. Class A | 0.30% | 2.10% | 1.80% |
92.7% of WBIL is already inside SCHX.
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, SCHX or WBIL?
SCHX has an expense ratio of 0.03% while WBIL charges 1.55%. SCHX is the cheaper option, by $152 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, SCHX or WBIL?
Over the past year SCHX returned +16.62% vs +14.68% for WBIL, so SCHX leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (12 years), SCHX annualized +12.31% vs +4.57% for WBIL. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, SCHX or WBIL?
SCHX has been the more volatile fund at 14.9% annualized versus 11.9% for WBIL. Worst drawdown: SCHX -34.3% vs WBIL -25.3%.
Should I hold both SCHX and WBIL?
SCHX and WBIL have a monthly-return correlation of 0.76, 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 SCHX and WBIL?
92.7% of WBIL's money is in holdings SCHX also owns. 92.7% of WBIL's is in holdings SCHX also owns. They hold 60 positions in common, counted across the 752 positions we hold weights for in SCHX and 64 in WBIL.
Which pays a higher dividend, SCHX or WBIL?
SCHX yields 1.04% while WBIL yields 0.04%, so SCHX currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is WBIL better than SCHX?
SCHX has a lower expense ratio. SCHX led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. WBIL is less concentrated, with 23.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 36.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.