Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
AIRR vs SCHG: how they differ
Over the year AIRR returned more, +15.0% against +12.7%, and SCHG charges 0.04% against 0.69%.
First Trust RBA American Industrial Renaissance ETF and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, AIRR and SCHG hold 1% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | AIRR | SCHG |
|---|---|---|
| COMFORT SYSTEMS USA INC | 4.42% | 0.23% |
| EMCOR GROUP INC | 3.75% | 0.13% |
| MASTEC INC | 4.18% | 0.08% |
| RBC BEARINGS INC | 1.85% | 0.06% |
| CLEAN HARBORS INC | 2.44% | 0.05% |
| SAIA INC | 3.54% | 0.04% |
| ADVANCED DRAINAGE SYSTEMS INC | 2.29% | 0.04% |
| CORE & MAIN INC | 2.07% | 0.03% |
| Only in AIRR | Only in SCHG |
|---|---|
| STERLING INFRASTRUCTURE INC 6.00% | NVIDIA Corp 11.02% |
| ARGAN INC 4.73% | Apple Inc 9.84% |
| CH ROBINSON WORLDWIDE INC 4.08% | Microsoft Corp 7.18% |
| OWENS CORNING 3.90% | Amazon.com Inc 5.68% |
| DYCOM INDUSTRIES INC 3.76% | Alphabet Inc 4.76% |
| BWX TECHNOLOGIES INC 2.97% | Broadcom Inc 4.55% |
| POWELL INDUSTRIES INC 2.48% | Tesla Inc 3.92% |
| HUNTINGTON INGALLS INDUSTRIES INC 2.45% | Alphabet Inc 3.78% |
Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and May 31, 2026.
| AIRR First Trust RBA American Industrial Renaissance ETF | SCHG Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Thematic ETF | Core index fund |
| Issuer | First Trust | Schwab |
| What it is | Reshoring and manufacturing | U.S. Large-Cap Growth |
| Total return, 1 year | +15.0% | +12.7% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −2.5 pts | −4.8 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.69% | 0.04% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 5.5% | 95.4% |
| Holdings | 58 | 193 |
AIRR in plain words
By weight, 6% of AIRR's portfolio is stocks that are also in the S&P 500; its active share against the S&P 500 is 100%. The top ten holdings are 30% of the fund across 58 positions, as published by its issuer for Sep 10, 2026. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 the fund returned +15.0% with distributions reinvested against +17.5% for the S&P 500, so a holder was behind by 2.5 pts. It sits 19.5% below its all-time high of Jun 22, 2026.
SCHG in plain words
SCHG is an index equity fund tracking the U.S. Large-Cap Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +12.7% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.04% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 95% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 193 positions, with the top ten at 57.2%.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, AIRR or SCHG?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, AIRR returned +15.0% and SCHG returned +12.7%, so AIRR returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, AIRR or SCHG?
- AIRR charges 0.69% a year and SCHG charges 0.04%, so SCHG is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do AIRR and SCHG overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 6% of AIRR and 95% of SCHG by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 1% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.
- Are AIRR and SCHG the same kind of fund?
- No. AIRR is a thematic ETF and SCHG is an index ETF, so they are built for different jobs. The table compares what both publish: return, cost and what each actually holds.
Other comparisons
Where to next
Where these figures came from
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, AIRR against SCHG, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/AIRR-SCHG Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources