Jump to any asset
Vanguard Morningstar Growth ETF vs Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
VS
Comparative Analysis
SCHG wins this head-to-head comparison against VUG, driven by its superior long-term growth performance and slightly lower expense ratio. While both ETFs track large-cap growth stocks, SCHG has demonstrated a stronger track record over multiple time horizons, particularly in its 5-year and 10-year trailing returns. VUG, despite its larger net assets and longer history, shows slightly weaker performance relative to its category average in shorter timeframes. The decision hinges on SCHG's consistent outperformance in growth metrics and its cost efficiency, making it the preferred choice for investors prioritizing capital appreciation. SCHG's advantage is most pronounced when looking at longer-term growth. Its 10-year trailing return of 18.66% outpaces VUG's 17.76%. This sustained growth, coupled with a marginally lower expense ratio, positions SCHG as the more efficient vehicle for capturing large-cap growth. VUG's substantial net assets and older inception date do not translate into superior performance in this comparison. Investors seeking pure growth exposure with a slight edge in efficiency will find SCHG more compelling.
Key Differentiator
The key differentiator between SCHG and VUG is SCHG's superior long-term growth performance and slightly lower expense ratio. SCHG has consistently delivered higher trailing returns over 5 and 10-year periods, indicating a more effective strategy for capturing growth in the large-cap segment. Coupled with its lower expense ratio (0.04% vs 0.03%), SCHG offers a more cost-efficient path to achieving superior long-term capital appreciation.
Joint Outlook
The outlook for both VUG and SCHG remains tied to the performance of large-cap growth stocks, particularly within the technology sector. SCHG is expected to continue its trajectory of strong growth, benefiting from its portfolio's exposure to innovative companies. Its lower expense ratio provides a slight edge in compounding returns over the long term. VUG, while a solid performer, may face challenges in consistently outpacing SCHG given its slightly weaker long-term return profile. However, its larger asset base and longer track record offer a degree of stability. Investors should anticipate continued volatility in growth stocks, with potential outperformance from SCHG driven by its growth focus and cost efficiency, assuming the technology sector remains a primary driver of market gains.
Price Analysis Comparison
Asset Metrics
| Metric | VUG | SCHG |
|---|---|---|
| 52 Week Range | $69.63 - $90.60 | $27.96 - $36.11 |
| Prev. Close | $87.68 | $35.01 |
| Market Cap | 20.21B | N/A |
| 24h Volume | 5.39M | 6.26M |
As both VUG and SCHG are large-cap growth ETFs, traditional valuation metrics like P/E ratios are not directly applicable to the funds themselves but rather to their underlying holdings. However, the performance data indirectly reflects the market's valuation of growth stocks. SCHG's superior trailing returns, especially over 5 and 10 years, suggest that its portfolio has been more effective at capitalizing on growth opportunities, implying a potentially more favorable valuation environment for its constituent companies or a better selection of high-growth potential stocks. VUG's trailing returns, while strong, lag SCHG's over the longer term. This could indicate that VUG's holdings may be slightly less attractively valued or that its sector concentration is less optimal for current market conditions. The difference in performance, though seemingly small, compounds significantly over time, making SCHG the more compelling option for investors focused on growth-driven valuation.
Market Performance
| Metric | VUG | SCHG |
|---|---|---|
| Volatility (30D) | 17.37% | 16.74% |
| 24h Range | $86.85 - $87.52 | $34.74 - $34.98 |
| Market Strength (RSI) | 50.3 | 46.3 |
| Trend (SMA 50) | Bullish | Bearish |
Both assets exhibit similar volatility levels (~17%). VUG is in a Bullish trend, while SCHG remains Bearish relative to its 50-day average.
Technical Indicators
| Indicator | VUG | SCHG |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 50.26 | 46.27 |
| 50-Day MA | $87.01 | $34.87 |
| 200-Day MA | $82.55 | $32.88 |
SCHG exhibits weaker current momentum compared to VUG, with a lower RSI (46.27 vs 50.26) and a more oversold Stochastic reading (8.76 vs 19.18). Both ETFs are trading below their 20-day exponential moving averages, indicating short-term weakness. VUG's MACD value of 0.19 is also higher than SCHG's 0.08, suggesting slightly more positive momentum. However, both ETFs are trading above their 50-day and 200-day simple moving averages, which generally supports a longer-term uptrend. VUG's price is closer to its 50-day SMA (87.01) than SCHG's (34.87), indicating it is more in line with its intermediate-term trend. Despite VUG's slightly better short-term technical indicators, SCHG's longer-term growth performance is the dominant factor in this comparison.
AI Analyst Sentiment
Technical rating — based on current price action versus moving averages and momentum. This measures short-term chart trend, not analyst opinion or company fundamentals.
VUG
Technical Score: 75/100
SCHG
Technical Score: 75/100
As both VUG and SCHG are ETFs with 'N/A' for analyst ratings and median targets, sentiment must be inferred from their performance and fund characteristics. SCHG's consistent outperformance in longer-term trailing returns, particularly its 5-year and 10-year figures, suggests a positive market sentiment towards its underlying holdings and strategy. VUG, while also performing well, has not matched SCHG's long-term growth trajectory. This could imply a slightly less enthusiastic market sentiment towards VUG's specific composition or sector weighting compared to SCHG, despite VUG's larger net assets and longer history.
Risk Stratification
| Metric | VUG | SCHG |
|---|---|---|
| Sharpe Ratio | 0.59 | 0.57 |
The primary risk for both VUG and SCHG lies in the inherent volatility of large-cap growth stocks, which are sensitive to interest rate changes and economic slowdowns. SCHG's stronger long-term growth performance, while attractive, also means it may be more exposed to a downturn in the technology and communication services sectors, which dominate its holdings. A significant correction in these sectors could disproportionately impact SCHG. VUG, with its slightly higher allocation to Technology and Communication Services, faces similar sector-specific risks. However, VUG's larger net assets and longer history might suggest a more established and potentially resilient portfolio construction, though its shorter-term trailing returns have lagged SCHG. Both ETFs carry the risk of underperforming broader market indices if growth stocks fall out of favor.
Comparative ProTips
- Consider SCHG for its demonstrated long-term growth advantage and slightly lower expense ratio, making it a more efficient choice for capital appreciation.
- While VUG has larger assets under management and a longer history, SCHG's performance metrics over the past 5 and 10 years suggest a more potent growth engine.
- Monitor the technology sector concentration in both ETFs, as significant downturns in this area could impact performance.
Monte Carlo Projection (10yr)
Actionable Trade Plans
Compare entry, exit, and risk management levels for both assets
Select Your Trade Bias
Risk Tolerance
Conservative
3%
Aggressive
Portfolio Value
$
✎
Position Size: $200 - $300 per asset
VUG
Current: $87.21
ENTRY ZONES
Conservative
$82.85
Aggressive
$87.21
RISK MANAGEMENT
STOP LOSS
$80.36
MAX LOSS
-3%
Volatility-Adjusted Stop Loss
Calculated based on volatility and technical support levels.
Profit Targets (Based on Conservative)
+5%
$86.99
+10%
$91.13
+15%
$95.28
SCHG
Current: $34.86
ENTRY ZONES
Conservative
$33.12
Aggressive
$34.86
RISK MANAGEMENT
STOP LOSS
$32.12
MAX LOSS
-3%
Volatility-Adjusted Stop Loss
Calculated based on volatility and technical support levels.
Profit Targets (Based on Conservative)
+5%
$34.77
+10%
$36.43
+15%
$38.08
Calculate Your Trade
Disclaimer
This comparison involves assets with varying risk profiles. The content is for educational purposes only. Identifying the stronger asset is based on relative strength (RS) and technical convergence. Past correlation does not guarantee future lockstep movement. Trading involves risk of loss. Note: The AI favored SCHG based on growth trajectory. This is valid for the specified timeframe only.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which ETF offers better long-term growth potential, VUG or SCHG?+
SCHG offers better long-term growth potential, evidenced by its superior 5-year (13.26% vs 12.15%) and 10-year (18.66% vs 17.76%) trailing returns compared to VUG.
What are the key risks associated with investing in VUG and SCHG?+
Both ETFs are concentrated in large-cap growth stocks, making them vulnerable to interest rate hikes and economic downturns. Their significant exposure to the technology sector also presents sector-specific risks.
Which ETF is more cost-effective, VUG or SCHG?+
SCHG is more cost-effective with an expense ratio of 0.04%, compared to VUG's 0.03%. This means SCHG costs $40 per $10,000 invested annually, while VUG costs $30 per $10,000 invested annually.
How do VUG and SCHG compare in terms of sector exposure?+
Both ETFs are heavily weighted towards Technology. VUG has a higher concentration in Technology (56.32%) than SCHG (46.96%). VUG also has a larger allocation to Communication Services (15.45%) compared to SCHG (13.05%).
What is the historical performance difference between VUG and SCHG?+
SCHG has historically outperformed VUG, particularly over longer periods. For instance, its 10-year trailing return is 18.66% versus VUG's 17.76%.
How do the net assets and inception dates compare?+
VUG has significantly larger net assets ($379.4 billion) and an earlier inception date (November 2, 1992) compared to SCHG ($63.0 billion net assets, inception December 11, 2009).
Are there any significant differences in their fund families?+
Yes, VUG is part of the Vanguard fund family, known for its low-cost index funds, while SCHG belongs to Schwab ETFs, also recognized for competitive pricing.