Performance Profile
On a one-year basis, measured through Dec. 31 2025, NOBL returned 6.8% on a total-return basis, ahead of SCHD’s 4.3%. Over longer horizons, however, SCHD has outpaced NOBL. The Schwab fund has delivered stronger cumulative returns across the past five-year and ten-year periods, according to the total-return figures cited. Both strategies experienced comparable peak-to-trough declines in the latest five-year window: NOBL’s maximum drawdown reached −17.91%, while SCHD’s fell to −16.82%.
An additional gauge, the hypothetical growth of a $1,000 investment over five years, shows the two vehicles ending in a similar range. NOBL’s capital base rose to $1,308, versus $1,298 for SCHD. Though those numbers differ only marginally, they underscore how returns can converge even when methodologies vary.
Portfolio Construction and Methodology
SCHD tracks an index of 102 large-capitalization U.S. companies with consistent dividend records. The approach tilts toward sectors where established firms often hold durable cash flows. As of the most recent data, the fund allocates 19.3% of assets to energy, 18.5% to consumer staples, and 16.1% to healthcare. Its three largest positions are Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck & Co., and ConocoPhillips.
NOBL confines its universe to members of the S&P 500 that have grown their dividends for at least 25 consecutive years—commonly referred to as “Dividend Aristocrats.” This stringent screen produces a smaller portfolio of 70 stocks. Sector exposure leans toward industrials at 22.4%, consumer defensive at 22.0%, and financial services at 12.4%. The fund’s biggest holdings currently include Albemarle, Cardinal Health, and C.H. Robinson Worldwide.
Because of its dividend-growth requirement, NOBL may omit higher-yielding equities that lack lengthy increase streaks, whereas SCHD can hold companies with shorter—but still solid—payment histories, allowing for higher yield at the portfolio level.
Risk Considerations
Both ETFs display beta levels near the broader equity market, signaling similar volatility characteristics relative to the S&P 500. Over the five-year measuring period used for beta calculations, neither fund exhibited outsized price swings. Nonetheless, investors should note that sector concentrations—particularly SCHD’s heavier weight in energy and NOBL’s tilt toward industrials—can amplify exposure to cyclical trends within those industries.
Fund Tenure and Track Record
SCHD launched more than 14 years ago, providing an extended history of distributions and market behavior. NOBL’s inception occurred later but still affords a multi-year sample of performance under varying economic conditions. Historical data help investors assess how each strategy managed periods of rising rates, market downturns, and shifts in dividend policy.
Key Takeaways for Portfolio Planning
Investors comparing the two funds often start with headline statistics such as fees and yields, yet broader factors matter as well. NOBL’s emphasis on prolonged dividend growth can appeal to those who value steady, annual payout increases. SCHD, in contrast, aims to deliver a higher current yield alongside low costs and a slightly wider sector mix. The decision may ultimately hinge on whether an investor prefers greater present-day income (SCHD) or a portfolio composed exclusively of companies with decades-long growth streaks (NOBL).
More detailed information on dividend investing strategies is available from Investopedia’s educational resources, which outline how dividends contribute to total return and portfolio stability.
Crédito da imagem: The Motley Fool
