SCHH vs XLRE: Yield, Cost and Returns Compared
As of Nov 5, 2026, XLRE yields more: 3.25% (dividend yield) against 2.86% for SCHH. SCHH is cheaper to own at 0.07% a year vs 0.08%. Over the same 11 years (Oct 2015 to Oct 2026), XLRE returned 6.7% a year with distributions reinvested, and SCHH 4.3%.
| Compared | SCHH | XLRE |
|---|---|---|
| YieldDividend yield | 2.86% | 3.25% |
| Expense ratio | 0.07% | 0.08% |
| Total return, 1 yr | +12.7% | +9.3% |
| Total return, 3 yr (a year) | +13.7% | +13.1% |
| Total return, 5 yr (a year) | +1.8% | +1.4% |
| Total return, 10 yr (a year) | +4.2% | +7.0% |
| Worst drop since Oct 2015 | -31.5% | -32.3% |
| Share price since Oct 2015 | +17% | +39% |
| Pays | Quarterly | Quarterly |
| Issuer | Schwab | State Street Investment Management |
| Assets | $11.0B | $8.2B |
| Started | 2011 | 2015 |
| Type | Real Estate | Real Estate |
Higher yield
XLRE
3.25%
Lower cost
SCHH
0.07%
Better total return
XLRE
6.7%/yr
Smaller worst drop
SCHH
-31.5%
Key facts: SCHH vs XLRE
Data as of · Source: SmarterDividends data
- As of Nov 5, 2026, SCHH yields 2.86% (dividend yield) and XLRE yields 3.25% (dividend yield).
- SCHH's expense ratio is 0.07% and XLRE's is 0.08%: $7 vs $8 a year on $10,000.
- From Oct 2015 to Oct 2026, $10,000 in SCHH grew to $15,820 (4.3% a year) and $10,000 in XLRE to $20,363 (6.7% a year), distributions reinvested.
- Their worst month-end drops over that time: -31.5% for SCHH and -32.3% for XLRE.
- 10 of SCHH's top ten holdings are also in XLRE's top ten, an overlap of at least 51% of the fund.
Cite this page
SmarterDividends, "SCHH vs XLRE: Yield, Cost and Returns Compared," updated Nov 5, 2026, https://smarterdividends.com/compare/schh-vs-xlre
$10,000 in each, Oct 2015 to Oct 2026
Distributions reinvested, month-end values, with the S&P 500 for reference.
SCHH became
$15,820
4.3% a year
XLRE became
$20,363
6.7% a year
Year by year
| Year | SCHH | XLRE |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 | +2.2% | +2.6% |
| 2024 | +5.0% | +5.1% |
| 2023 | +11.2% | +12.4% |
| 2022 | −25.0% | −26.2% |
| 2021 | +41.1% | +46.1% |
| 2020 | −15.1% | −2.2% |
| 2019 | +22.8% | +28.6% |
| 2018 | −4.1% | −2.4% |
| 2017 | +2.7% | +10.7% |
| 2016 | +6.5% | +2.8% |
Total return each calendar year, distributions reinvested.
Top holdings
10 of the top ten overlap, at least 51% of each fund.
SCHH
- WELL Welltower Inc10.0%
- PLD Prologis Inc8.3%
- AMT American Tower Corp5.0%
- SPG Simon Property Group Inc4.7%
- EQIX Equinix Inc4.5%
- DLR Digital Realty Trust Inc4.5%
- PSA Public Storage3.9%
- O Realty Income Corp3.9%
- VMRK Vivmark Residential3.2%
- VTR Ventas Inc3.1%
XLRE
- WELL Welltower Inc11.3%
- PLD Prologis Inc8.1%
- EQIX Equinix Inc6.7%
- AMT American Tower Corp5.9%
- PSA Public Storage5.0%
- SPG Simon Property Group Inc4.8%
- DLR Digital Realty Trust Inc4.3%
- VMRK Vivmark Residential4.3%
- VTR Ventas Inc4.3%
- O Realty Income Corp4.3%
SCHH vs XLRE: questions
Is SCHH or XLRE better?
It depends on the job. XLRE pays more today (3.25% vs 2.86%), SCHH costs less, and XLRE has the better total return over Oct 2015 to Oct 2026, with SCHH holding up better in its worst stretch. For income, look at yield and whether the payouts hold up; for growth, total return and drawdowns.
Which pays a higher dividend, SCHH or XLRE?
XLRE, at 3.25% against 2.86% for SCHH as of Nov 5, 2026. On $10,000 that's about $325 vs $286 a year at today's rates.
Which has the better total return?
XLRE. From Oct 2015 to Oct 2026, it returned 6.7% a year with distributions reinvested, against 4.3% for SCHH. $10,000 became $20,363 vs $15,820.
Which is cheaper, SCHH or XLRE?
SCHH, with a 0.07% expense ratio against 0.08%.
Do SCHH and XLRE hold the same things?
Partly. 10 of their top ten holdings match (WELL, PLD, AMT, SPG), at least 51% of each fund. Owning both doubles up on those.
Related comparisons
Yields, costs and holdings as each fund reports them (via Yahoo Finance), updated daily; returns from month-end prices with distributions reinvested. SCHH leads on 5 of 8 measures above. For information only, not investment advice. Last fund data: Nov 5, 2026.