IWB vs SCHX: returns, risk and drawdowns compared
iShares Russell 1000 ETF against Schwab U.S. Large-Cap ETF, over the same 16 years (December 2009 to October 2026) with dividends reinvested.
Data updated October 2026
From December 2009 to October 2026, IWB returned 14.0% a year and SCHX 12.7% a year on average, so IWB came out ahead by 1.3% a year. IWB was the more volatile of the two (14.5% against 14.5% a year), and the deepest falls from a month-end high were 24.6% for IWB and 25.3% for SCHX.
The correlation of monthly returns was 1.00: they moved almost in lockstep. Over 168 rolling 3-year periods, IWB did better in 100% and SCHX in 0%.
Side by side
| IWB | SCHX | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual return (CAGR) | +14.0% | +12.7% |
| Total return | +821% | +656% |
| Annual volatility | 14.5% | 14.5% |
| Maximum drawdown (month-end) | −24.6% | −25.3% |
| Worst month | −13.3% | −13.4% |
| Best month | +13.2% | +13.0% |
| Positive months | 68% | 67% |
| Best year | 2013: +32.8% | 2013: +30.4% |
| Worst year | 2022: −19.2% | 2022: −20.3% |
| 1-year return | +15.9% | +15.9% |
| 5 years, a year | +11.9% | +11.4% |
| 10 years, a year | +15.1% | +14.1% |
| Trading currency | USD | USD |
First nine rows: the same 203 months for both funds. Trailing returns: to each fund’s last close.
Growth of 10,000: IWB vs SCHX
Returns by calendar year
| Year | IWB | SCHX |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 | +17.2% | +17.5% |
| 2024 | +24.3% | +24.1% |
| 2023 | +26.4% | +25.6% |
| 2022 | −19.2% | −20.3% |
| 2021 | +26.3% | +25.4% |
| 2020 | +20.8% | +18.8% |
| 2019 | +31.1% | +29.1% |
| 2018 | −4.9% | −6.1% |
| 2017 | +21.5% | +20.1% |
| 2016 | +12.0% | +10.0% |
| 2015 | +0.8% | −0.6% |
| 2014 | +13.1% | +11.6% |
| 2013 | +32.8% | +30.4% |
| 2012 | +16.5% | +14.0% |
| 2011 | +1.2% | −0.1% |
| 2010 | +16.1% | +14.3% |
How the figures are calculated
Total return in the fund’s trading currency, from end-of-day prices with dividends reinvested on the ex-date. The fund’s own ongoing charges are already reflected in its price; trading costs, taxes and currency conversion are not included. Past returns do not predict future returns.
The comparison uses only the months in which both funds have prices, so the figures cover the same period even when one fund is older.
Questions
Which has returned more, IWB or SCHX?
From December 2009 to October 2026, IWB returned +14.0% a year and SCHX +12.7% a year, with dividends reinvested. Over rolling 3-year periods IWB did better in 100% of cases. Past returns do not predict future returns.
Which is riskier, IWB or SCHX?
Over the same months annual volatility was 14.5% for IWB and 14.5% for SCHX; the deepest fall from a month-end high was 24.6% and 25.3%, and the worst single month −13.3% and −13.4%.
How correlated are IWB and SCHX?
The correlation of their monthly returns was 1.00: they moved almost in lockstep. Holding both adds little diversification compared with holding one.
More comparisons
Source: MarketStack end-of-day prices, total return with dividends reinvested. Figures are historical and descriptive; they are not forecasts and not investment advice. MEDGE Capital does not recommend buying or selling any instrument. Risk disclaimer.