PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
BLUC vs. FNDB
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

BLUC vs. FNDB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF (BLUC) and Schwab Fundamental U.S. Broad Market Index ETF (FNDB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, BLUC achieves a 11.99% return, which is significantly lower than FNDB's 19.45% return.


BLUC

1D
-0.28%
1M
2.33%
6M
12.99%
YTD
11.99%
1Y
21.94%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
25.12%

FNDB

1D
-0.47%
1M
2.64%
6M
12.38%
YTD
19.45%
1Y
32.96%
3Y*
19.89%
5Y*
13.57%
10Y*
14.07%
ALL TIME*
13.12%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$691.35K$726.25K$1.13M
$6.53M$5.81M$4.99M

BLUC vs. FNDB - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between BLUC and FNDB is 0.71, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.71

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 23, 2025

0.71

The correlation between BLUC and FNDB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.71 to 0.71 - a consistent structural relationship.

BLUC vs. FNDB - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
BLUC
FNDB

Technology

43.1%
19.6%

Communication Services

11.8%
8.4%

Consumer Cyclical

10.0%
9.6%

Financial Services

9.5%
14.8%

Healthcare

7.8%
12.7%

Industrials

7.3%
10.3%

Consumer Defensive

3.7%
7.2%

Energy

2.3%
8.3%

Utilities

1.6%
3.2%

Real Estate

1.6%
2.5%

Basic Materials

1.4%
3.4%

Technology

BLUC
43.1%
FNDB
19.6%

Communication Services

BLUC
11.8%
FNDB
8.4%

Consumer Cyclical

BLUC
10.0%
FNDB
9.6%

Financial Services

BLUC
9.5%
FNDB
14.8%

Healthcare

BLUC
7.8%
FNDB
12.7%

Industrials

BLUC
7.3%
FNDB
10.3%

Consumer Defensive

BLUC
3.7%
FNDB
7.2%

Energy

BLUC
2.3%
FNDB
8.3%

Utilities

BLUC
1.6%
FNDB
3.2%

Real Estate

BLUC
1.6%
FNDB
2.5%

Basic Materials

BLUC
1.4%
FNDB
3.4%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

BLUC vs. FNDB — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

BLUC
BLUC Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
BLUC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
BLUC Sortino Ratio Rank: 5454
Sortino Ratio Rank
BLUC Omega Ratio Rank: 5353
Omega Ratio Rank
BLUC Calmar Ratio Rank: 5050
Calmar Ratio Rank
BLUC Martin Ratio Rank: 5757
Martin Ratio Rank

FNDB
FNDB Risk / Return Rank: 9595
Overall Rank
FNDB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9696
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FNDB Sortino Ratio Rank: 9595
Sortino Ratio Rank
FNDB Omega Ratio Rank: 9595
Omega Ratio Rank
FNDB Calmar Ratio Rank: 9494
Calmar Ratio Rank
FNDB Martin Ratio Rank: 9494
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

BLUC vs. FNDB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF (BLUC) and Schwab Fundamental U.S. Broad Market Index ETF (FNDB). 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.


BLUCFNDBDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.53

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-2.11

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.28

1.57

-0.30

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.06

5.26

-3.20

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.77

20.73

-12.96

BLUC vs. FNDB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current BLUC Sharpe Ratio is 1.57, which is lower than the FNDB Sharpe Ratio of 3.10. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of BLUC and FNDB, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

BLUC vs. FNDB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum BLUC drawdown since its inception was -10.69%, smaller than the maximum FNDB drawdown of -38.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BLUC and FNDB.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


BLUCFNDBDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-10.69%

-38.17%

+27.48%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.69%

-6.29%

-4.40%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.83%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.29%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.17%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.28%

-0.47%

+0.19%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-1.76%

-3.62%

+1.86%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.83%

1.59%

+1.24%

Volatility

BLUC vs. FNDB - Volatility Comparison

Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF (BLUC) has a higher volatility of 4.60% compared to Schwab Fundamental U.S. Broad Market Index ETF (FNDB) at 2.74%. This indicates that BLUC's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FNDB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


BLUCFNDBDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.60%

2.74%

+1.86%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.38%

7.75%

+3.63%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.09%

10.70%

+3.39%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

13.68%

15.24%

-1.56%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

13.68%

17.43%

-3.75%

BLUC vs. FNDB - Expense Ratio Comparison

BLUC has a 0.23% expense ratio, which is lower than FNDB's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

BLUC vs. FNDB - Dividend Comparison

BLUC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.61%, less than FNDB's 1.41% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
BLUC
Bluemonte Large Cap Core ETF
0.61%0.46%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
FNDB
Schwab Fundamental U.S. Broad Market Index ETF
1.41%1.62%1.74%1.80%1.98%1.63%2.15%2.23%2.41%1.91%2.06%2.26%

Frequently Asked Questions


BLUC and FNDB have a correlation of 0.71, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

BLUC has higher volatility (4.60%) compared to FNDB (2.74%). In terms of maximum drawdown, BLUC dropped -10.69% vs FNDB's -38.17%.

On 1-year performance, FNDB leads with 32.96% vs 21.94% for BLUC. On fees, BLUC is cheaper at 0.23% per year. On volatility, FNDB has been the lower-risk option at 2.74%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, FNDB has performed better with a 32.96% return vs 21.94%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

BLUC is cheaper with a 0.23% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for FNDB.

FNDB has the higher dividend yield at 1.41%, compared with 0.61% for BLUC.

BLUC is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while FNDB is Large Cap Value Equities. They also come from different issuers: Bluemonte and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.23% for BLUC and 0.25% for FNDB.

FNDB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.10 vs 1.57), 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.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for BLUC and FNDB

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer