Data as of Sep 4, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

SCHD vs XYLD

Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF and Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, SCHD and XYLD hold 7% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions SCHD and XYLD both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingSCHDXYLD
Chevron Corp3.84%0.59%
Procter & Gamble Co/The3.55%0.55%
UnitedHealth Group Inc5.10%0.54%
Home Depot Inc/The3.37%0.53%
Coca-Cola Co/The3.96%0.49%
Merck & Co Inc3.87%0.44%
Texas Instruments Inc5.92%0.41%
PepsiCo Inc3.45%0.35%
Verizon Communications Inc3.66%0.33%
QUALCOMM Inc6.75%0.31%
ConocoPhillips3.52%0.25%
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co2.94%0.20%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in SCHDOnly in XYLD
Amgen Inc 3.48%NVIDIA CORPORATION 7.85%
Abbott Laboratories 2.97%APPLE INC. 6.45%
Accenture PLC 2.90%MICROSOFT CORPORATION 4.90%
Automatic Data Processing Inc 2.25%AMAZON.COM, INC. 4.19%
Target Corp 1.45%ALPHABET INC. 3.63%
Archer-Daniels-Midland Co 0.97%BROADCOM INC. 3.20%
East West Bancorp Inc 0.42%ALPHABET INC. 2.89%
Best Buy Co Inc 0.38%META PLATFORMS, INC. 2.17%

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 as filed for Apr 30, 2026 and May 31, 2026.

SCHD and XYLD on the fields both publish, as of Sep 4, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
SCHD
Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
XYLD
Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF
Where it sitsCore fundIncome desk
IssuerSchwabGlobal X
What it isUS dividendcovered call, vs ACWI
Total return, 1 year+30.3%+18.6%
S&P 500 over the same days+20.0%+22.7%
Gap to the S&P 500+10.3 pts−4.1 pts
Cash paid, 1 yearnot an income fund11.1%
Expense ratio0.06%0.60%
Holdings99n/a

SCHD in plain words

SCHD is a index equity fund tracking US dividend. Over the year to Sep 4, 2026 it returned +30.3% with distributions reinvested, against +20.0% for the S&P 500 and +25.6% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.06% 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 99 positions, with the top ten at 43.7%.

XYLD in plain words

Over the year to Sep 4, 2026, XYLD paid 11.1% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 6.5%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +18.6%. All-country world (ACWI) returned +22.7% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 4.1 pts. At its price on Sep 4, 2026 the latest distribution annualises to 9.0%, paid monthly. Global X estimates that 93% of the distribution paid Aug 27, 2026 was a return of capital (19a-1 notice, estimated, a tax characterisation rather than a measure of erosion).

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, SCHD or XYLD?
In the year to Sep 4, 2026, with distributions reinvested, SCHD returned +30.3% and XYLD returned +18.6%, so SCHD returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, SCHD or XYLD?
SCHD charges 0.06% a year and XYLD charges 0.60%, so SCHD is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Are SCHD and XYLD the same kind of fund?
No. SCHD is an index ETF and XYLD is an option-income 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.

SCHD against XYLD, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 4, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, SCHD against XYLD, data as of Sep 4, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/SCHD-XYLD.html Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources