SCHD vs VTV: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
SCHD and VTV are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. SCHD is Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF, while VTV is Vanguard Morningstar Value ETF. VTV is broader by holdings count, with 311 positions versus 102 for SCHD. SCHD is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight.
What is the main difference between SCHD and VTV?
VTV holds 311 positions to SCHD's 102, and 18% of their weight is in the same securities.
| Metric | SCHD | VTV |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.06% | 0.03% |
| Holdings | 102 | 311 |
| Top-10 concentration | 42% | 22.5% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 3.04% | 1.85% |
| Average volume | 22,407,196 | 2,820,884 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | +29.4% | +21.5% |
| YTD return | +26.5% | +17.6% |
| 5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested | +9.8% | +12% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 11.3% | 10.2% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -7.6% | -6.9% |
| Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested | -16.8% | -17% |
| Beta | 0.22 | 0.55 |
| Sharpe ratio | 2.02 | 1.53 |
| Sortino ratio | 3.82 | 2.48 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 68/100 | 68/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 10/10 | 10/10 |
| Momentum | 79/100 | 81/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 71/100 | 78/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Value ETF
SCHD and VTV are effectively level
SCHD and VTV are effectively level on the AIQ Score; the factor table below shows where each one holds its advantage.
Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
Vanguard Morningstar Value ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score does not currently separate SCHD and VTV as of Oct 21, 2026. Both names are scored on the same 0–100 scale across Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience, and the factor table below shows where each one holds its advantage.
Compare Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF and Vanguard Morningstar Value ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
SCHD vs VTV: 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 | SCHD | VTV | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.06% | 0.03% | VTV |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 102 | 311 | VTV |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 42% | 22.5% | VTV |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 3.04% | 1.85% | SCHD |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years | -16.8% | -17% | Similar |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 11.3% | 10.2% | VTV |
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 SCHD and VTV 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.
- Risk Resilience71 vs 78VTV +7
- Quality76 vs 71SCHD +5
- Value51 vs 49Even
- Momentum79 vs 81Even
Neither name separates cleanly on the covered dimensions.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience -1
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +17
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
SCHD's lead narrowed by 5 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SCHD and VTV 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 | SCHD | VTV | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.06% | 0.03% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 102 | 311 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 22,407,196 | 2,820,884 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 11.3% | 10.2% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -7.6% | -6.9% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | 2.02 | 1.53 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 0.22 | 0.55 | 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
SCHD and VTV share 17.72% of their weighted exposure across 40 common holdings.
59 holdings are unique to SCHD, and 268 holdings are unique to VTV. 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 22.48% for VTV (102 holdings vs 311). 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 | SCHD | VTV | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| UNHUNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC | 3.93% | 1.4% | 1.4% |
| CVXCHEVRON | 4.28% | 1.38% | 1.38% |
| PGPROCTER & GAMBLE | 3.89% | 1.25% | 1.25% |
| HDHOME DEPOT | 3.73% | 1.23% | 1.23% |
| MRKMERCK & CO INC | 4.81% | 1.2% | 1.2% |
| KOCOCA-COLA | 4.25% | 1.12% | 1.12% |
| AMGNAMGEN INC | 4.31% | 0.77% | 0.77% |
| PEPPEPSICO | 3.66% | 0.71% | 0.71% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What SCHD adds that VTV doesn’t
| Holding | SCHD | VTV |
|---|---|---|
| MRKMERCK & CO INC | 4.81% | 1.2% |
| ABTABBOTT LABORATORIES | 4.52% | 0.68% |
| AMGNAMGEN INC | 4.31% | 0.77% |
| CVXCHEVRON | 4.28% | 1.38% |
| KOCOCA-COLA | 4.25% | 1.12% |
| COPCONOCOPHILLIPS | 4.2% | 0.55% |
What VTV adds that SCHD doesn’t
| Holding | VTV | SCHD |
|---|---|---|
| JPMJPMorgan Chase & Co | 3.5% | Not held |
| MUMicron Technology Inc | 3.45% | Not held |
| BRK-BBerkshire Hathaway Inc | 2.99% | Not held |
| XOMExxonMobil Holdings Corp | 2.39% | Not held |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson | 2.29% | Not held |
| WMTWalmart Inc | 1.81% | 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.
SCHD vs VTV: five-year payout growth
SCHD grew its split-adjusted payout faster over 2020-2025 — 9.15% a year against VTV's 5.14%. SCHD never reduced its annual distribution in the window; VTV did in 1 year.
| Dividend metric | SCHD | VTV |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y payout CAGR | 9.15% | 5.14% |
| 2020 annual payout | $0.676 | $3.040 |
| 2025 annual payout | $1.048 | $3.906 |
| Calendar-year declines | 0 | 1 |
| Peer rank | #8 of 33 | #94 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
How each independent group of evidence reads the pair.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 68 vs 68 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | Even | Value 51 vs 49 |
| Technicals | SCHD | Price vs 50-day 1.9% vs 0.9%; vs 200-day 8.2% vs 6.2% |
| Risk Resilience | VTV | Risk Resilience 71 vs 78 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
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 0 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 0 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20SCHD lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 0 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- Level
- 68 vs 68
- 7 sessions ago
- SCHD +3
- 68 vs 65
- 30 sessions ago
- SCHD +1
- 57 vs 56
- 90 sessions ago
- SCHD +1
- 66 vs 65
The lead changed hands 4 times in this window, most recently on Oct 13 when SCHD moved ahead of VTV.
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.
6 bullish / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only SCHD
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
6 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
No signal that the other name lacks.
Both carry 8 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, ATR Contraction - Coiling, Keltner Channel Breakout, RSI Overbought, EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish, 52-Week High Proximity, Uptrend Structure Active, MACD Bullish Crossover.
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 -0.09%, AIQ -1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.19%, AIQ +4 points).
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 | SCHD | VTV |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 4% | 1.7% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 2.8% | 1.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 5.4% | 2.4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 12% | 10.6% |
| Year to date | 26.5% | 17.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 29.4% | 21.5% |
Technicals
SCHD has the stronger structure| Metric | SCHD | VTV |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 86 | 80.2 |
| ADX (14) | 30.4 | 24.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.9% | 0.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 8.2% | 6.2% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 12.6% | 8.9% |
Risk
VTV is the more resilient| Metric | SCHD | VTV |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.22 | 0.55 |
| Sharpe ratio | 2.02 | 1.53 |
| Sortino ratio | 3.82 | 2.48 |
| Max drawdown | -7.6% | -6.9% |
| Current drawdown | -1.5% | -1.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 11.3% | 10.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1% | -1.1% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between SCHD and VTV?
VTV holds 311 positions to SCHD's 102, and 18% of their weight is in the same securities.
How much do SCHD and VTV overlap?
SCHD and VTV share 17.72% of their weighted exposure across 40 common holdings. 59 holdings are unique to SCHD, and 268 holdings are unique to VTV. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Which ETF is more diversified, SCHD or VTV?
VTV holds more positions: 311 versus 102 for SCHD.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
VTV has the lower expense ratio, 0.03% a year against 0.06% for SCHD.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
SCHD, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 3.04% against 1.85% for VTV.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
SCHD has been more volatile over the past year, at 11.3% annualized against 10.2% for VTV.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
Their worst peak-to-trough falls over the past five years are similar: -16.8% for SCHD and -17% for VTV.
Compare SCHD and VTV 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.