SCHG vs IWF: returns, risk and drawdowns compared
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF against iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF, over the same 16 years (February 2010 to October 2026) with dividends reinvested.
Data updated October 2026
From February 2010 to October 2026, SCHG returned 15.9% a year and IWF 15.3% a year on average, so SCHG came out ahead by 0.6% a year. SCHG was the more volatile of the two (16.6% against 16.2% a year), and the deepest falls from a month-end high were 32.1% for SCHG and 31.0% for IWF.
The correlation of monthly returns was 0.99: they moved almost in lockstep. Over 166 rolling 3-year periods, SCHG did better in 64% and IWF in 36%.
Side by side
| SCHG | IWF | |
|---|---|---|
| Annual return (CAGR) | +15.9% | +15.3% |
| Total return | +1076% | +978% |
| Annual volatility | 16.6% | 16.2% |
| Maximum drawdown (month-end) | −32.1% | −31.0% |
| Worst month | −13.2% | −12.2% |
| Best month | +14.7% | +14.7% |
| Positive months | 65% | 63% |
| Best year | 2023: +49.5% | 2023: +41.8% |
| Worst year | 2022: −32.1% | 2022: −29.8% |
| 1-year return | +11.9% | +5.2% |
| 5 years, a year | +12.9% | +11.3% |
| 10 years, a year | +18.1% | +17.1% |
| Trading currency | USD | USD |
First nine rows: the same 201 months for both funds. Trailing returns: to each fund’s last close.
Growth of 10,000: SCHG vs IWF
Returns by calendar year
| Year | SCHG | IWF |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 | +17.5% | +18.0% |
| 2024 | +34.6% | +32.6% |
| 2023 | +49.5% | +41.8% |
| 2022 | −32.1% | −29.8% |
| 2021 | +27.6% | +26.9% |
| 2020 | +38.3% | +37.4% |
| 2019 | +34.9% | +34.8% |
| 2018 | −2.4% | −2.5% |
| 2017 | +26.8% | +28.8% |
| 2016 | +5.8% | +5.8% |
| 2015 | +2.2% | +4.4% |
| 2014 | +14.6% | +11.6% |
| 2013 | +32.6% | +31.7% |
| 2012 | +15.5% | +13.8% |
| 2011 | −1.6% | +1.3% |
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, SCHG or IWF?
From February 2010 to October 2026, SCHG returned +15.9% a year and IWF +15.3% a year, with dividends reinvested. Over rolling 3-year periods SCHG did better in 64% of cases. Past returns do not predict future returns.
Which is riskier, SCHG or IWF?
Over the same months annual volatility was 16.6% for SCHG and 16.2% for IWF; the deepest fall from a month-end high was 32.1% and 31.0%, and the worst single month −13.2% and −12.2%.
How correlated are SCHG and IWF?
The correlation of their monthly returns was 0.99: 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.