SCHZ vs XLF: Complete Comparison

Schwab U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF vs Financial Select Sector SPDR Fund — overlap, correlation, performance & risk analysis

Holdings Overlap
0.00%
Very Low Overlap
Shared Holdings
0 of 10
Complete portfolio analysis
Calculation Method
Min Weight
Weighted intersection

Visual Overlap

SCHZ
XLF
0.0%
SCHZ Only
Overlap
XLF Only

Price Performance

Historical price comparison over 3M

SCHZ Return
-0.74%
XLF Return
-7.65%
Winner
SCHZ
+6.91%
Max Drawdown
SCHZ: -2.5%
XLF: -14.0%
SCHZ Volatility (annualized)4.06%
XLF Volatility (annualized)16.23%

📈 Comparison

Metric
SCHZ
XLF
1 Year Return
N/A
+28.5%
3 Year Return
N/A
+10.5%
5 Year Return
N/A
+14.8%
Volatility
undefined%
21.50%
Expense Ratio
0.50%
0.10%
⚠️ Past performance does not guarantee future results. Data may be delayed.

⚔️ Comparison

4 - 10

🏆 XLF wins this comparison

Key Factors

💰 Expense Ratio
SCHZ:0.50%
vs
XLF:0.10%
🎯 Number of Holdings
SCHZ:10 holdings
vs
XLF:68 holdings
Additional Metrics (3)
⚖️ Concentration Risk
SCHZ: 46.2% in top 10
XLF: 55.7% in top 10
📊 Assets Under Management
SCHZ: $5B
XLF: $40B
🔍 Uniqueness vs SPY
SCHZ: 100.0% unique
XLF: 86.3% unique

Bottom line: XLF wins with better expense ratio and number of holdings. Consider XLF for your portfolio, but SCHZ is still a solid choice if you prefer its specific advantages.

Detailed Overlap Analysis

0 shared holdings representing 0.0% portfolio overlap

Top Shared Holdings

#StockSCHZ WeightXLF WeightOverlap
0
Shared Stocks
0.0%
Total Overlap
0
Sectors Represented

Top Holdings Only in SCHZ

Unique to SCHZ

Scroll horizontally to see all data
SymbolNameWeight
UST-10YU.S. Treasury Note 10Y8.50%
UST-5YU.S. Treasury Note 5Y7.20%
UST-30YU.S. Treasury Bond 30Y5.80%
UST-2YU.S. Treasury Note 2Y5.40%
FNMA-MBSFNMA Mortgage-Backed4.85%

Top Holdings Only in XLF

Unique to XLF

Scroll horizontally to see all data
SymbolNameWeight
BRK-BBRK-B11.80%
JPMJPM10.82%
VV7.26%
MAMA5.81%
BACBAC4.78%

Price Correlation

How We Calculate Overlap

We use the minimum weight method with normalization to calculate portfolio overlap:

Overlap = Σ min(weightA, weightB) for each shared holding

Normalization: Holdings weights are normalized to sum to 100% before comparison. This ensures accurate overlap calculations even when analyzing partial holdings data (e.g., top 50 positions).

Conservative approach: We consider only the smaller allocation for each shared position, giving you a realistic view of true portfolio overlap.

📊 This analysis is based on publicly available holdings data. For the most current and complete holdings information, please visit the official ETF provider websites.

Want deeper analysis on SCHZ or XLF?

Complement your EigenDex analysis with these research tools.

Some links may be affiliate links. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. This helps support EigenDex as a free tool. We only recommend tools we believe provide genuine value to investors.

Compare More ETFs