SCHD vs XLK: Which ETF Is Better in 2026?
A metric-by-metric comparison of Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF (SCHD) and State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLK) — both Dividend Income / Technology funds — using ETFValuer's daily-updated rankings.
Educational content — not financial advice. Data as of August 09, 2026. ~5 minute read.
The Verdict
SCHD (Dividend Income) and XLK (Technology) sit in different corners of the market, so this is less a head-to-head than a question of what role each would play. They can be complements rather than alternatives — the metrics below show how differently the two have actually behaved.
On ETFValuer's overall model — which blends return, risk-adjusted performance, cost, drawdown, size and volatility — SCHD scores higher: 82.7 (Grade B+) versus 77.0 for XLK. That doesn't make XLK a bad fund; it means SCHD currently edges it out on this specific mix of factors. Read the metric-by-metric breakdown below before deciding which matters more for your own portfolio.
Head-to-Head: Every Metric
| SCHD | XLK | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Dividend Income | Technology |
| Expense ratio | 0.06% | 0.08% |
| Fund size (AUM) | $104.2B | $115.4B |
| Dividend yield | 3.13% | 0.60% |
| 1-year return | +31.73% | +43.67% |
| 3-year return | +52.56% | +126.15% |
| Volatility | 11.06% | 25.90% |
| Max drawdown | -16.12% | -25.66% |
| Sharpe ratio | 2.42 | 1.49 |
| ETFValuer score | 82.7 | 77.0 |
| Grade | B+ | B+ |
| Overall rank | #7 | #26 |
Bold marks the better value in each row. "Better" is directional only (e.g. lower cost, higher return) — it isn't a recommendation by itself. See the full methodology.
Cost
On cost, the two are essentially tied — SCHD charges 0.06% a year versus XLK's 0.08%. A difference this small (about $2.00 a year on a $10,000 position) isn't a reason to choose one fund over the other.
What XLK's Fees Cost You
XLK charges an expense ratio of 0.08% a year, deducted automatically from the fund's value. Small percentages compound into real money — adjust the figures below to see the impact on your own numbers.
Assumes a constant gross return and no additional contributions — a simplification, but it isolates exactly what the expense ratio costs. Try the full fee calculator to model contributions and compare any two funds.
Performance & Risk
Over the trailing 3 years, XLK returned +126.15% versus +52.56% for SCHD — a gap of about 73.6 percentage points. On risk, SCHD has held up better historically, with a shallower max drawdown (-16.12% vs. -25.66%). SCHD currently has the better risk-adjusted return (Sharpe ratio of 2.42 vs. 1.49), meaning it delivered more return per unit of volatility taken on.
How Closely Do They Track Each Other?
Over the last 3.0 years of daily returns (752 shared trading days), SCHD and XLK show a low correlation of 0.357 — largely independent of each other. These funds move largely on their own schedules. Combining them is a real diversification decision rather than a redundant one, which is the case where owning both can genuinely reduce portfolio volatility.
| Measure | Value | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| Daily return correlation | 0.357 | Low — largely independent of each other |
| R-squared | 12.8% | 12.8% of SCHD's daily moves are explained by XLK's |
| Tracking error (annualised) | 23.79% | Typical yearly spread between the two funds' returns |
| Annualised return over 3.0y | SCHD +15.18% · XLK +31.29% | XLK ahead by 16.10 points a year |
Correlation alone understates how far these can drift. Across every rolling 12-month window in the period, SCHD finished as much as +10.9 points ahead of XLK at the best extreme and -44.0 points at the worst — a 54.9-point spread between the best and worst year of relative performance. Two funds can correlate tightly day to day and still deliver very different outcomes over any single year you happen to hold them.
Calculated from daily total returns over the trailing 3-year window, recomputed every day this site refreshes. Correlation of 1.00 means the two funds moved in lockstep; 0.00 means their daily moves were unrelated.
Holdings Overlap
SCHD and XLK share no companies among their top 10 reported holdings. That points to genuinely different exposure, so holding both is more likely to diversify than to duplicate. Full portfolios may still overlap further down the list.
Based on the top 10 holdings in each fund's most recent SEC N-PORT-P filing.
Which One Should You Pick?
Lean SCHD if…
- You want the lower running cost — 0.06% vs 0.08%, about $2 a year less on a $10,000 position
- Current income matters to you — it yields 3.13% against 0.60%
- It has been the calmer ride (11.1% volatility vs 25.9%) with a shallower worst-case fall (-16.1% vs -25.7%)
- You care about return per unit of risk — its Sharpe ratio of 2.42 beats 1.49
Lean XLK if…
- You weight recent results heavily — it returned 126.2% over 3 years against 52.6%
These two are not really substitutes, so "both, in some proportion" is often the right answer rather than picking one. Model the blend with the Portfolio Blender.
See it in a portfolio
SCHD is one of the twelve funds in the portfolio game. Start with 25% of a virtual $10,000 in it, build the rest however you like, and the builder shows the range this mix has actually produced over every five-day stretch of the last three years — before you commit to anything.
Free, no sign-up, virtual money only.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is SCHD or XLK better?
On ETFValuer's overall model — which blends return, risk-adjusted performance, cost, drawdown, size and volatility — SCHD scores higher: 82.7 (Grade B+) versus 77.0 for XLK. That doesn't make XLK a bad fund; it means SCHD currently edges it out on this specific mix of factors. Read the metric-by-metric breakdown below before deciding which matters more for your own portfolio.
Which has the lower expense ratio, SCHD or XLK?
SCHD currently has the lower expense ratio (0.06% vs. 0.08%).
Can I hold both SCHD and XLK?
Yes, and it may be worth doing. SCHD and XLK correlate at only 0.36 over the past 3.0 years, so they behave differently enough that holding both is a genuine diversification decision rather than a redundant one. Size each to the role you want it to play.
Go deeper on either fund
Full daily-updated metrics, holdings context, and category peers.