SCHA vs SPMD: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
SCHA and SPMD are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. SCHA is Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF, while SPMD is State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 400 Mid Cap ETF. SCHA is broader by holdings count, with 1,705 positions versus 403 for SPMD. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has SPMD ahead on AIQ Score, 60 versus 59.
What is the main difference between SCHA and SPMD?
SCHA holds 1,705 positions to SPMD's 403, and 32% of their weight is in the same securities.
| Metric | SCHA | SPMD |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.03% | 0.03% |
| Holdings | 1,705 | 403 |
| Top-10 concentration | 10.7% | 7.8% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 1.13% | 1.31% |
| Average volume | 2,890,861 | 1,537,217 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | +16.8% | +13.6% |
| YTD return | +14.4% | +10.6% |
| 5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested | +5.8% | +7% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 18.7% | 15.1% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -11.5% | -9.2% |
| Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested | -30.8% | -24.1% |
| Beta | 1.20 | 0.95 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.74 | 0.65 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.28 | 1.09 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 59/100 | 60/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 7/10 | 8/10 |
| Momentum | 48/100 | 55/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 76/100 | 83/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF vs State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 400 Mid Cap ETF
SPMD leads
SPMD leads by 1 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from SCHA.
Fragile: 1 of 4 evidence groups support SPMD, the lead recently changed hands, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF
State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 400 Mid Cap ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SPMD over SCHA, 60 versus 59 as of Oct 21, 2026. SPMD's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and risk resilience, while SCHA holds the stronger value profile. SPMD also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 1 of 4 covered evidence groups favor SPMD today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 1 points. SPMD lead: Reversed — SCHA led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; SPMD now leads by 1.
Compare Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF and State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 400 Mid Cap ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
SCHA vs SPMD: 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 | SCHA | SPMD | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.03% | 0.03% | Similar |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 1,705 | 403 | SCHA |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 10.7% | 7.8% | Similar |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 1.13% | 1.31% | Similar |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years | -30.8% | -24.1% | SPMD |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 18.7% | 15.1% | SPMD |
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 SCHA and SPMD 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.
- Momentum48 vs 55SPMD +7
- Risk Resilience76 vs 83SPMD +7
- Value55 vs 51SCHA +4
- Quality64 vs 61Even
1 of 4 evidence groups favor SPMD. SPMD’s edge is concentrated in momentum and risk resilience; SCHA keeps a meaningful value edge.
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 +15
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +13
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
SPMD's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SCHA and SPMD both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
SPMD (State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 400 Mid Cap ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and risk resilience.
SCHA (Schwab U.S. Small-Cap ETF): the counter-case, on value, valuation.
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 | SCHA | SPMD | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.03% | 0.03% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 1,705 | 403 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 2,890,861 | 1,537,217 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 18.7% | 15.1% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -11.5% | -9.2% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.74 | 0.65 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 1.20 | 0.95 | 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
SCHA and SPMD share 31.73% of their weighted exposure across 231 common holdings.
1,469 holdings are unique to SCHA, and 170 holdings are unique to SPMD. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
SCHA is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 10.68% of the fund, against 7.8% for SPMD (1,705 holdings vs 403). 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 | SCHA | SPMD | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| ATIATI INC | 0.58% | 0.78% | 0.58% |
| CDECOEUR MINING INC | 0.45% | 0.6% | 0.45% |
| MTSIMACOM TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS H | 0.38% | 0.51% | 0.38% |
| MKSIMKS INC | 0.38% | 0.51% | 0.38% |
| PNFPPINNACLE FINANCIAL PARTNERS | 0.32% | 0.43% | 0.32% |
| SMTCSEMTECH CORP | 0.32% | 0.42% | 0.32% |
| STRLSTERLING INFRASTRUCTURE INC | 0.32% | 0.43% | 0.32% |
| SITMSITIME CORP | 0.29% | 0.38% | 0.29% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What SCHA adds that SPMD doesn’t
| Holding | SCHA | SPMD |
|---|---|---|
| SNDKSANDISK | 5.37% | Not held |
| LITELUMENTUM HOLDINGS | 1.56% | Not held |
| RVMDREVOLUTION MEDICINES | 0.87% | Not held |
| GHGUARDANT HEALTH | 0.45% | Not held |
| IOTSAMSARA CLASS A | 0.3% | Not held |
| BMNRBITMINE IMMERSION TECHNOLOGIES | 0.29% | Not held |
What SPMD adds that SCHA doesn’t
| Holding | SPMD | SCHA |
|---|---|---|
| TWLOTWILIO INC A | 1% | Not held |
| ILMNILLUMINA INC | 0.87% | Not held |
| FTITECHNIPFMC PLC | 0.86% | Not held |
| PEVERPURE INC A | 0.85% | Not held |
| OKTAOKTA INC | 0.82% | Not held |
| NVTNVENT ELECTRIC PLC | 0.72% | 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.
SCHA vs SPMD: five-year payout growth
SCHA and SPMD grew their split-adjusted payouts at the same rate over 2020-2025, 8.89% a year. SPMD never reduced its annual distribution in the window; SCHA did in 2 years. SCHA: The 2020 payout was 11.1% below 2019, so the growth rate measures a recovery from a weak starting year.
| Dividend metric | SCHA | SPMD |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y payout CAGR | 8.89% | 8.89% |
| 2020 annual payout | $0.234 | $0.525 |
| 2025 annual payout | $0.358 | $0.804 |
| Calendar-year declines | 2 | 0 |
| Peer rank | #65 of 138 | #64 of 138 |
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
1 of 4 covered evidence groups favor SPMD. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 59 vs 60 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | SCHA | Value 55 vs 51 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -3% vs -1.6%; vs 200-day 0.3% vs 0.3% |
| Risk Resilience | SPMD | Risk Resilience 76 vs 83 |
| 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 SCHA and SPMD 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 narrow at 1 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 1 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
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 SPMD.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20SPMD lead: Reversed — SCHA led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; SPMD now leads by 1.
- Today
- SPMD +1
- 59 vs 60
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 58 vs 58
- 30 sessions ago
- SCHA +2
- 55 vs 53
- 90 sessions ago
- SCHA +1
- 65 vs 64
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Aug 21 when SCHA moved ahead of SPMD.
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.
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only SCHA
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral
Only SPMD
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Golden Cross Active, ATR Contraction - Coiling.
SCHA is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.31%, AIQ +3 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.39%, AIQ +3 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.
- 1SCHA closes the Momentum gap — currently 7 points behind, the largest single contributor to SPMD's edge.
- 2SCHA's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3SPMD's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
SCHA leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | SCHA | SPMD |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0% | -0.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -3.5% | -0.5% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -5.4% | -3.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 1.4% | 0.2% |
| Year to date | 14.4% | 10.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 16.8% | 13.6% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | SCHA | SPMD |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 49.2 | 57.6 |
| ADX (14) | 32.7 | 39.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -3% | -1.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0.3% | 0.3% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 15.4% | 12.6% |
Risk
SPMD is the more resilient| Metric | SCHA | SPMD |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.2 | 0.95 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.74 | 0.65 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.28 | 1.09 |
| Max drawdown | -11.5% | -9.2% |
| Current drawdown | -9.8% | -7.1% |
| Annualized volatility | 18.7% | 15.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.8% | -1.6% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between SCHA and SPMD?
SCHA holds 1,705 positions to SPMD's 403, and 32% of their weight is in the same securities.
How much do SCHA and SPMD overlap?
SCHA and SPMD share 31.73% of their weighted exposure across 231 common holdings. 1,469 holdings are unique to SCHA, and 170 holdings are unique to SPMD. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Which ETF is more diversified, SCHA or SPMD?
SCHA holds more positions: 1,705 versus 403 for SPMD.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
Neither: both charge 0.03% a year.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
Their trailing 12-month distribution yields are similar: 1.13% for SCHA and 1.31% for SPMD.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
SCHA has been more volatile over the past year, at 18.7% annualized against 15.1% for SPMD.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
SPMD fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -24.1% against -30.8% for SCHA.
Compare SCHA and SPMD 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.