proxyvotesnow.com

Home › Asset managers › Charles Schwab › 2025-2026

Charles Schwab proxy voting record, 2025-2026

Charles Schwab reported 464,757 proxy votes on Form N-PX for the 2026 season. On the 330,275 ballot items the board itself put forward — directors, pay, the auditor, capital — it voted FOR 93.6% of the time. On the 2,373 environmental and social proposals put on the ballot by shareholders, it voted FOR 0.8% of the time.

2023-20242024-20252025-2026

On the board’s own proposals

93.6% FOR of 330,275 fund votes on board proposals in 2025-2026: directors, pay, auditor, capital.

FOR 309,100 AGAINST 15,894 Abstained or withheld 5,281

How we count these

On proposals shareholders put on the ballot

0.8% FOR of 2,373 fund votes on environmental and social proposals shareholders put on the ballot. The board opposed 2,356.

FOR 20 AGAINST 2,353 Abstained 13

See the 20 it backed →

How we count these

By proposal type

A single “voted with management” figure makes every manager look the same: director elections are most of the volume and nearly everyone votes FOR them. The record is therefore reported per category, using the category the filer itself put on each item in its N-PX.

Charles Schwab, 2025-2026. “Decided” is FOR + AGAINST, the denominator of the two percentage columns; abstentions and withheld votes are shown separately and are never inside a percentage. Counted in ballot items — one fund’s vote on one proposal at one meeting — never in shares.
Proposal typePut on the ballot by ItemsDecided Voted FORVoted AGAINST Abstained / withheld
Director Elections Board (159 inferred) 216,446 206,771 96.4% 3.6% 4,826
Director Elections Shareholders (377 inferred) 568 377 54.4% 45.6% 110
Corporate Governance Board (3 inferred) 56,135 51,529 94.3% 5.7% 355
Corporate Governance Shareholders (104 inferred) 2,167 2,108 16.4% 83.6% 8
Capital Structure Board (3 inferred) 33,413 32,004 92.2% 7.8% 235
Capital Structure Shareholders (85 inferred) 442 432 52.3% 47.7% 1
Audit-related Board 31,827 31,092 99.3% 0.7% 126
Audit-related Shareholders (16 inferred) 39 34 82.4% 17.6% 0
Compensation Board 28,697 26,683 86.5% 13.5% 93
Compensation Shareholders (15 inferred) 389 366 12.8% 87.2% 9
Say-on-Pay Board 26,906 24,941 91.8% 8.2% 1
Say-on-Pay Shareholders (14 inferred) 14 14 100.0% 0.0% 0
Extraordinary Transactions Board 3,546 3,531 98.0% 2.0% 0
Extraordinary Transactions Shareholders (36 inferred) 72 65 61.5% 38.5% 0
Shareholder Rights and Defenses Board 1,797 1,764 92.6% 7.4% 11
Shareholder Rights and Defenses Shareholders (8 inferred) 1,707 1,707 21.0% 79.0% 0
Other Social Issues Board 795 788 89.7% 10.3% 4
Other Social Issues Shareholders 1,001 973 2.1% 97.9% 13
Environment or Climate Board 105 88 96.6% 3.4% 17
Environment or Climate Shareholders 1,041 1,002 1.3% 98.7% 4
Human Rights or Human Capital/workforce Shareholders 497 497 2.4% 97.6% 0
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Board 10 10 100.0% 0.0% 0
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Shareholders 301 301 0.0% 100.0% 0
Investment Company Matters Board 6 6 100.0% 0.0% 0
Investment Company Matters Shareholders 52 52 0.0% 100.0% 0
Other Board 45 33 36.4% 63.6% 12

An item the filer put in two categories is counted in both rows, so the rows add up to more than the total. Who put an item on the ballot is decided item by item: the filer’s own answer on Form N-PX (Item 1(h)), or, where the filing does not give one, the proposal’s own wording (820 items, shown as inferred). The two figures above use only part of these rows: the board figure, board proposals on directors, pay, the auditor, capital, transactions and fund matters; the shareholder figure, environmental, social, workforce and diversity shareholder proposals at US-listed companies. How we count these

Every proposal where Charles Schwab broke with the board (6,004 distinct proposals) →

What Charles Schwab said it would do

The page above is what Charles Schwab did. Its published proxy voting policy — what it said it would do — is in the voting policy library under Charles Schwab, with the documents for each year and, where one exists, a year-on-year comparison.

What is being counted

The unit is a fund-level observation: one fund’s vote on one proposal at one meeting. It is not a share, not a filing line and not a proposal.
Charles Schwab filed 464,757 vote records for 2025-2026; after removing votes filed twice in different N-PX filings, that is 408,018 ballot items (fund-level observations) across 9,084 issuer names and 52 funds. They cover 115,412 distinct proposals: one proposal voted by twenty of its funds is twenty ballot items here and one proposal. Proposals are counted per issuer name and meeting, and wordings of the same director nominee are counted once; two different wordings of any other proposal count twice, so this is an upper bound. A fund that reported several directions for the same item is a split vote, counted on its own (see the table below) and not collapsed into the larger direction. “Issuer names” is literal: filers spell the same company several ways and those are counted separately here, so this runs higher than the number of distinct companies.
Share counts are not used anywhere on this page.
Share figures in N-PX carry their own long list of corrections in this dataset, and a share-weighted rate would inherit every one of them. Every percentage here is a count of items.
Abstentions are reported, never hidden inside a percentage.
On the board’s own proposals an abstention or a withheld vote is not support, so it is in the denominator of the FOR figure and not in its numerator. On shareholder proposals an abstention is neither support nor opposition, so it is excluded from the denominator and shown on its own.
15,025 items are outside both headline figures.
Besides the table rows neither figure uses:
ExcludedItemsWhy
Not voted12,160 Reported as not voted, take no action or do not vote. No position was expressed, so there is nothing to count.
Other ballot type1,886 Frequency ballots (one / two / three years) and anything else that is not a FOR, AGAINST, abstention or withhold.
Direction indeterminate0 The fund reported several directions for one ballot item with no shares attached to any of them, so which way it voted cannot be established.
Split vote979 The fund voted its shares in more than one direction on the item (for example some FOR and some AGAINST), the smaller part at least 5% of its shares. It is not collapsed into the larger part.

About this page

Every figure is derived from Form N-PX, the filing in which registered funds disclose how they voted every proxy and institutional managers disclose their votes on executive pay (say-on-pay, say-on-frequency and golden parachutes). Figures are rebuilt weekly; this page was built on October 13, 2026. The interactive database shows the same votes company by company, including every individual fund.

Charles Schwab proxy season coverage: 2023-2024 · 2024-2025 · 2025-2026 (this page).