BDIV vs. FNDX

Last updated Jul 14, 2026

BDIV (AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF) and FNDX (Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds. BDIV is actively managed, while FNDX is passively managed. Over the past year, BDIV returned 17.81% vs 28.47% for FNDX. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. BDIV charges 0.49%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for FNDX.

Performance

BDIV vs. FNDX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF (BDIV) and Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF (FNDX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BDIV achieves a 8.84% return, which is significantly lower than FNDX's 16.60% return.

BDIV

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: 0.47%
• 6M: 6.27%
• YTD: 8.84%
• 1Y: 17.81%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

FNDX

• 1D: 0.22%
• 1M: 0.96%
• 6M: 12.91%
• YTD: 16.60%
• 1Y: 28.47%
• 3Y*: 19.71%
• 5Y*: 13.66%
• 10Y*: 14.04%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

BDIV vs. FNDX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
BDIV AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF	8.84%	18.59%	3.01%
FNDX Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF	16.60%	16.94%	3.63%

Correlation

The correlation between BDIV and FNDX is 0.80, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.80
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 31, 2024	0.85

The correlation between BDIV and FNDX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.80 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

BDIV vs. FNDX - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	BDIV	FNDX
Technology	22.6%	22.1%
Financial Services	14.7%	13.3%
Industrials	13.1%	9.1%
Healthcare	10.3%	11.9%
Consumer Defensive	7.7%	7.0%
Utilities	6.8%	3.0%
Communication Services	6.5%	9.9%
Energy	5.9%	9.3%
Consumer Cyclical	4.6%	9.1%
Basic Materials	4.5%	3.6%
Real Estate	3.3%	1.7%

Return for Risk

BDIV vs. FNDX — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

BDIV

BDIV Risk / Return Rank: 71
BDIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 74
BDIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 77
BDIV Omega Ratio Rank: 72
BDIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 64
BDIV Martin Ratio Rank: 70

FNDX

FNDX Risk / Return Rank: 93
FNDX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
FNDX Sortino Ratio Rank: 94
FNDX Omega Ratio Rank: 93
FNDX Calmar Ratio Rank: 92
FNDX Martin Ratio Rank: 92

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

BDIV vs. FNDX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF (BDIV) and Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF (FNDX). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	BDIV	FNDX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.87	2.78	-0.90
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.74	3.87	-1.13
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.51	-0.18
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.55	4.72	-2.17
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.09	18.25	-8.16

BDIV vs. FNDX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BDIV Sharpe Ratio is 1.87, which is lower than the FNDX Sharpe Ratio of 2.78. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BDIV and FNDX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

BDIV vs. FNDX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BDIV drawdown since its inception was -14.98%, smaller than the maximum FNDX drawdown of -37.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BDIV and FNDX.

Drawdown Indicators

	BDIV	FNDX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-14.98%	-37.72%	+22.74%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.01%	-6.06%	-0.95%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-16.30%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-19.06%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-37.72%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.29%	0.00%	-0.29%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.91%	-3.54%	+1.63%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.77%	1.56%	+0.21%

Volatility

BDIV vs. FNDX - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF (BDIV) is 2.18%, while Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF (FNDX) has a volatility of 2.59%. This indicates that BDIV experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FNDX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	BDIV	FNDX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.18%	2.59%	-0.41%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.24%	7.42%	-0.18%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	9.56%	10.33%	-0.77%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.15%	15.13%	-1.98%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.15%	17.44%	-4.29%

BDIV vs. FNDX - Expense Ratio Comparison

BDIV has a 0.49% expense ratio, which is higher than FNDX's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

BDIV vs. FNDX - Dividend Comparison

BDIV's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.57%, more than FNDX's 1.46% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
BDIV AAM Brentview Dividend Growth ETF	1.57%	1.14%	0.62%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
FNDX Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF	1.46%	1.63%	1.76%	1.82%	2.07%	1.64%	2.29%	2.23%	2.40%	1.86%	2.01%	2.01%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both BDIV and FNDX in my portfolio?

BDIV and FNDX have a correlation of 0.80, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, BDIV or FNDX?

FNDX has higher volatility (2.59%) compared to BDIV (2.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BDIV dropped -14.98% vs FNDX's -37.72%.

Which ETF is better, BDIV or FNDX?

On 1-year performance, FNDX leads with 28.47% vs 17.81% for BDIV. On fees, FNDX is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, BDIV has been the lower-risk option at 2.18%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, BDIV or FNDX?

Over the 1-year period, FNDX has performed better with a 28.47% return vs 17.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, BDIV or FNDX?

FNDX is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.49% for BDIV.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, BDIV or FNDX?

BDIV has the higher dividend yield at 1.57%, compared with 1.46% for FNDX.

What is the main difference between BDIV and FNDX?

They also come from different issuers: AAM and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.49% for BDIV and 0.25% for FNDX.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FNDX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.78 vs 1.87), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.