REGL vs SCHD: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
REGL and SCHD are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. REGL is ProShares - S&P MidCap 400 Dividend Aristocrats ETF, while SCHD is Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF. SCHD is broader by holdings count, with 102 positions versus 66 for REGL. SCHD is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has SCHD ahead on AIQ Score, 68 versus 55.
What is the main difference between REGL and SCHD?
REGL and SCHD have little in common: 1% of their weight is in the same securities.
| Metric | REGL | SCHD |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.4% | 0.06% |
| Holdings | 66 | 102 |
| Top-10 concentration | 17.2% | 42% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 2.22% | 3.04% |
| Average volume | 57,471 | 22,407,196 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | +7.9% | +29.4% |
| YTD return | +6.5% | +26.5% |
| 5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested | +7.1% | +9.8% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 12.4% | 11.3% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -9.8% | -7.6% |
| Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested | -17% | -16.8% |
| Beta | 0.36 | 0.22 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.33 | 2.02 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.60 | 3.82 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 55/100 | 68/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 5/10 | 10/10 |
| Momentum | 60/100 | 79/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 72/100 | 71/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
ProShares - S&P MidCap 400 Dividend Aristocrats ETF vs Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
SCHD leads
SCHD leads by 13 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Momentum.
Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support SCHD, and its current signal state is conflicted.
ProShares - S&P MidCap 400 Dividend Aristocrats ETF
Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SCHD over REGL, 68 versus 55 as of Oct 21, 2026. SCHD's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and momentum. SCHD also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor SCHD today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. SCHD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 13 points over 30 sessions.
Compare ProShares - S&P MidCap 400 Dividend Aristocrats ETF and Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
REGL vs SCHD: which fits what
Each row is settled by a single measure. Where the gap is too small to matter it reads Similar, and no row decides the comparison as a whole.
| If you want | REGL | SCHD | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.4% | 0.06% | SCHD |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 66 | 102 | SCHD |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 17.2% | 42% | REGL |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 2.22% | 3.04% | SCHD |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years | -17% | -16.8% | Similar |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 12.4% | 11.3% | SCHD |
Similar means the gap is within 0.01 percentage points of expense ratio, 25% more holdings, 3 points of top-10 weight, 0.2 points of yield, 2 points of drawdown or 1 point of volatility. Past drawdowns and volatility describe the funds’ history, not their future.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes for both ETFs.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare REGL and SCHD against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Quality42 vs 76SCHD +34
- Momentum60 vs 79SCHD +19
- Value54 vs 51Even
- Risk Resilience72 vs 71Even
2 of 4 evidence groups favor SCHD. SCHD’s edge is concentrated in quality and momentum.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +11
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience -1
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
SCHD's lead narrowed by 4 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — REGL and SCHD both carry a full feed there.
Fund facts, side by side
Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.
| Measure | REGL | SCHD | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.4% | 0.06% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 66 | 102 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 57,471 | 22,407,196 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 12.4% | 11.3% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -9.8% | -7.6% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.33 | 2.02 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 0.36 | 0.22 | Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio. |
Where the exposure actually sits
Sector exposure for each fund, ordered by the size of the difference.
How much of the same holdings they own
REGL and SCHD share 0.65% of their weighted exposure across 4 common holdings.
61 holdings are unique to REGL, and 95 holdings are unique to SCHD. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
SCHD is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 42.01% of the fund, against 17.2% for REGL (102 holdings vs 66). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.
Largest shared positions
| Holding | REGL | SCHD | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| AFGAMERICAN FINANCIAL GROUP INC | 1.62% | 0.24% | 0.24% |
| ORIOLD REPUBLIC INTL CORP | 1.55% | 0.23% | 0.23% |
| OZKBANK OZK | 1.5% | 0.13% | 0.13% |
| MZTIMARZETTI COMPANY/THE | 1.49% | 0.05% | 0.05% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What REGL adds that SCHD doesn’t
| Holding | REGL | SCHD |
|---|---|---|
| RGLDROYAL GOLD INC | 1.99% | Not held |
| UNMUNUM GROUP | 1.74% | Not held |
| AVNTAVIENT CORP | 1.73% | Not held |
| THGHANOVER INSURANCE GROUP INC/ | 1.72% | Not held |
| SEICSEI INVESTMENTS COMPANY | 1.69% | Not held |
| WTRGESSENTIAL UTILITIES INC | 1.69% | Not held |
What SCHD adds that REGL doesn’t
| Holding | SCHD | REGL |
|---|---|---|
| MRKMERCK & CO INC | 4.81% | Not held |
| ABTABBOTT LABORATORIES | 4.52% | Not held |
| AMGNAMGEN INC | 4.31% | Not held |
| CVXCHEVRON | 4.28% | Not held |
| KOCOCA-COLA | 4.25% | Not held |
| COPCONOCOPHILLIPS | 4.2% | Not held |
Each list is a fund’s largest positions by weight that the other fund does not hold, or holds at less than half the weight.
REGL vs SCHD: five-year payout growth
SCHD grew its split-adjusted payout faster over 2020-2025 — 9.15% a year against REGL's 5.21%. SCHD never reduced its annual distribution in the window; REGL did in 1 year.
| Dividend metric | REGL | SCHD |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y payout CAGR | 5.21% | 9.15% |
| 2020 annual payout | $1.513 | $0.676 |
| 2025 annual payout | $1.950 | $1.048 |
| Calendar-year declines | 1 | 0 |
| Peer rank | #17 of 33 | #8 of 33 |
Split-adjusted annual distributions, 2020–2025. Research as of Sep 19, 2026. Yield and expense ratio above are current values, not part of this window.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor SCHD. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | SCHD | 55 vs 68 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | Even | Value 54 vs 51 |
| Technicals | SCHD | Price vs 50-day -1.2% vs 1.9%; vs 200-day -0.5% vs 8.2% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 72 vs 71 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of REGL and SCHD and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 13 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- Only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on SCHD.
How the comparison changed
95 daily snapshots · Jun 22 – Oct 20SCHD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 13 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SCHD +13
- 55 vs 68
- 7 sessions ago
- SCHD +17
- 51 vs 68
- 30 sessions ago
- SCHD +11
- 46 vs 57
- 90 sessions ago
- SCHD +11
- 55 vs 66
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
2 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
No signal that the other name lacks.
6 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only SCHD
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.7%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 6 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Golden Cross Active, ATR Contraction - Coiling, BB Upper Band Breach, RSI Overbought, MACD Bullish Crossover.
SCHD leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.02%, AIQ +3 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.09%, AIQ -1 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1REGL closes the Quality gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to SCHD's edge.
- 2REGL's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3SCHD's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 6 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Performance
SCHD leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | REGL | SCHD |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.9% | 4% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 0.2% | 2.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -3.8% | 5.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -0.5% | 12% |
| Year to date | 6.5% | 26.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 7.9% | 29.4% |
Technicals
SCHD has the stronger structure| Metric | REGL | SCHD |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 70.6 | 86 |
| ADX (14) | 34.8 | 30.4 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.2% | 1.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -0.5% | 8.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 12.8% | 12.6% |
Risk
Split| Metric | REGL | SCHD |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.36 | 0.22 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.33 | 2.02 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.6 | 3.82 |
| Max drawdown | -9.8% | -7.6% |
| Current drawdown | -6.4% | -1.5% |
| Annualized volatility | 12.4% | 11.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.2% | -1% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between REGL and SCHD?
REGL and SCHD have little in common: 1% of their weight is in the same securities.
How much do REGL and SCHD overlap?
REGL and SCHD share 0.65% of their weighted exposure across 4 common holdings. 61 holdings are unique to REGL, and 95 holdings are unique to SCHD. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Which ETF is more diversified, REGL or SCHD?
SCHD holds more positions: 102 versus 66 for REGL.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
SCHD has the lower expense ratio, 0.06% a year against 0.4% for REGL.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
SCHD, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 3.04% against 2.22% for REGL.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
REGL has been more volatile over the past year, at 12.4% annualized against 11.3% for SCHD.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
Their worst peak-to-trough falls over the past five years are similar: -17% for REGL and -16.8% for SCHD.
Compare REGL and SCHD with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.