CFO vs. FNDX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CFO (VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF) and FNDX (Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - CFO is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Victory U.S. Large Cap 500 Long/Cash Volatility Weighted Index, while FNDX is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity US Large Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CFO returned 9.36%/yr vs 14.26%/yr for FNDX. Their correlation of 0.92 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CFO charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for FNDX.

Performance

CFO vs. FNDX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF (CFO) 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, CFO achieves a 6.66% return, which is significantly lower than FNDX's 14.57% return. Over the past 10 years, CFO has underperformed FNDX with an annualized return of 9.36%, while FNDX has yielded a comparatively higher 14.26% annualized return.

CFO

• 1D: -0.30%
• 1M: 1.87%
• YTD: 6.66%
• 6M: 6.96%
• 1Y: 13.59%
• 3Y*: 10.44%
• 5Y*: 3.88%
• 10Y*: 9.36%

FNDX

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: 3.88%
• YTD: 14.57%
• 6M: 14.58%
• 1Y: 32.32%
• 3Y*: 20.90%
• 5Y*: 12.82%
• 10Y*: 14.26%

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

CFO vs. FNDX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CFO VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF	6.66%	8.60%	15.37%	-3.56%	-14.46%	26.02%	19.84%	21.64%	-8.81%	22.65%
FNDX Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF	14.57%	16.94%	16.77%	18.23%	-6.92%	31.73%	9.12%	28.65%	-7.30%	17.12%

Correlation

The correlation between CFO and FNDX is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.93
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.91
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.91
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 3, 2014	0.92

The correlation between CFO and FNDX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.93 - a consistent structural relationship.

CFO vs. FNDX - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CFO	FNDX
Industrials	18.4%	9.3%
Financial Services	18.3%	14.1%
Technology	14.9%	19.1%
Consumer Cyclical	9.8%	9.2%
Healthcare	9.5%	12.0%
Utilities	9.0%	3.2%
Consumer Defensive	6.8%	7.4%
Energy	5.5%	10.3%
Basic Materials	3.6%	3.7%
Communication Services	3.6%	10.1%
Real Estate	0.5%	1.8%

Return for Risk

CFO vs. FNDX — Risk / Return Rank

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

CFO

CFO Risk / Return Rank: 38
CFO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
CFO Sortino Ratio Rank: 36
CFO Omega Ratio Rank: 34
CFO Calmar Ratio Rank: 39
CFO Martin Ratio Rank: 44

FNDX

FNDX Risk / Return Rank: 90
FNDX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
FNDX Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
FNDX Omega Ratio Rank: 90
FNDX Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
FNDX Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

CFO vs. FNDX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF (CFO) 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.

	CFO	FNDX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.27	3.18	-1.91
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.88	4.47	-2.59
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.22	1.59	-0.36
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.92	5.35	-3.43
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	7.10	20.97	-13.86
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CFO vs. FNDX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CFO Sharpe Ratio is 1.27, which is lower than the FNDX Sharpe Ratio of 3.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CFO 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.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	CFO	FNDX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.27	3.18	-1.91
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.29	0.85	-0.56
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.71	0.82	-0.11
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.65	0.79	-0.14

Drawdowns

CFO vs. FNDX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CFO drawdown since its inception was -24.35%, smaller than the maximum FNDX drawdown of -37.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CFO and FNDX.

Drawdown Indicators

	CFO	FNDX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-24.35%	-37.72%	+13.37%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.10%	-6.06%	-1.04%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-17.25%	-16.30%	-0.95%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-24.35%	-19.06%	-5.29%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-24.35%	-37.72%	+13.37%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.30%	-0.13%	-0.17%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-5.62%	-3.55%	-2.07%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.92%	1.55%	+0.37%

Volatility

CFO vs. FNDX - Volatility Comparison

VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF (CFO) has a higher volatility of 2.42% compared to Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF (FNDX) at 2.25%. This indicates that CFO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FNDX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CFO	FNDX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.42%	2.25%	+0.17%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	7.79%	7.25%	+0.54%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	10.75%	10.22%	+0.53%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	13.32%	15.18%	-1.86%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	13.27%	17.50%	-4.23%

CFO vs. FNDX - Expense Ratio Comparison

CFO has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than FNDX's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

CFO vs. FNDX - Dividend Comparison

CFO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.24%, less than FNDX's 1.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CFO VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF	1.24%	1.32%	1.44%	1.72%	3.95%	1.06%	0.90%	1.44%	1.49%	1.18%	1.35%	1.31%
FNDX Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF	1.45%	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 CFO and FNDX in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, CFO and FNDX move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, CFO or FNDX?

CFO has higher volatility (2.42%) compared to FNDX (2.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CFO dropped -24.35% vs FNDX's -37.72%.

Which ETF is better, CFO or FNDX?

On 10-year performance, FNDX leads with 14.26% vs 9.36% for CFO. On fees, FNDX is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, FNDX has been the lower-risk option at 2.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CFO or FNDX?

Over the 10-year period, FNDX has performed better with a 14.26% return vs 9.36%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CFO or FNDX?

FNDX is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for CFO.

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

FNDX has the higher dividend yield at 1.45%, compared with 1.24% for CFO.

What is the main difference between CFO and FNDX?

CFO is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while FNDX is Large Cap Value Equities. CFO tracks Nasdaq Victory U.S. Large Cap 500 Long/Cash Volatility Weighted Index, while FNDX tracks RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity US Large Index. They also come from different issuers: VictoryShares and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for CFO and 0.25% for FNDX.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FNDX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.18 vs 1.27), 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.