CWI vs. FNDF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

CWI (SPDR MSCI ACWI ex-US ETF) and FNDF (Schwab Fundamental International Large Company Index ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - CWI tracks the MSCI All Country World ex-U.S. Index while FNDF tracks the Russell Fundamental Developed ex-U.S. Large Company Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, CWI returned 9.91%/yr vs 11.93%/yr for FNDF. Their correlation of 0.95 suggests significant overlap in exposure. CWI charges 0.30%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for FNDF.

Performance

CWI vs. FNDF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in SPDR MSCI ACWI ex-US ETF (CWI) and Schwab Fundamental International Large Company Index ETF (FNDF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, CWI achieves a 13.91% return, which is significantly lower than FNDF's 21.21% return. Over the past 10 years, CWI has underperformed FNDF with an annualized return of 9.91%, while FNDF has yielded a comparatively higher 11.93% annualized return.

CWI

• 1D: -1.22%
• 1M: 5.25%
• YTD: 13.91%
• 6M: 16.33%
• 1Y: 32.11%
• 3Y*: 19.76%
• 5Y*: 8.77%
• 10Y*: 9.91%

FNDF

• 1D: -0.67%
• 1M: 6.97%
• YTD: 21.21%
• 6M: 24.72%
• 1Y: 44.71%
• 3Y*: 24.10%
• 5Y*: 13.35%
• 10Y*: 11.93%

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

CWI vs. FNDF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
CWI SPDR MSCI ACWI ex-US ETF	13.91%	32.75%	6.27%	15.74%	-15.39%	8.81%	9.83%	21.92%	-13.83%	26.89%
FNDF Schwab Fundamental International Large Company Index ETF	21.21%	40.99%	2.29%	20.22%	-7.78%	14.97%	3.61%	18.46%	-14.21%	23.98%

Correlation

The correlation between CWI and FNDF is 0.94, 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	0.94
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.94
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.95
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.95
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 16, 2013	0.95

The correlation between CWI and FNDF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

CWI vs. FNDF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	CWI	FNDF
Financial Services	17.4%	16.7%
Technology	14.9%	11.1%
Industrials	7.8%	15.9%
Consumer Cyclical	5.8%	10.7%
Healthcare	5.3%	5.5%
Energy	5.0%	12.3%
Basic Materials	4.4%	11.3%
Communication Services	3.2%	4.9%
Consumer Defensive	2.8%	6.9%
Utilities	1.2%	3.8%
Real Estate	0.9%	0.9%

Return for Risk

CWI vs. FNDF — Risk / Return Rank

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

CWI

CWI Risk / Return Rank: 60
CWI Sharpe Ratio Rank: 61
CWI Sortino Ratio Rank: 61
CWI Omega Ratio Rank: 62
CWI Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
CWI Martin Ratio Rank: 60

FNDF

FNDF Risk / Return Rank: 84
FNDF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
FNDF Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
FNDF Omega Ratio Rank: 85
FNDF Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
FNDF Martin Ratio Rank: 80

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.

CWI vs. FNDF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for SPDR MSCI ACWI ex-US ETF (CWI) and Schwab Fundamental International Large Company Index ETF (FNDF). 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.

	CWI	FNDF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.10	2.99	-0.89
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.90	3.89	-0.99
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.38	1.53	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.81	4.24	-1.43
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.92	16.19	-5.27
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

CWI vs. FNDF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current CWI Sharpe Ratio is 2.10, which is comparable to the FNDF Sharpe Ratio of 2.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of CWI and FNDF, 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

	CWI	FNDF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.10	2.99	-0.89
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.54	0.83	-0.29
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.58	0.68	-0.10
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.25	0.54	-0.29

Drawdowns

CWI vs. FNDF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum CWI drawdown since its inception was -60.77%, which is greater than FNDF's maximum drawdown of -40.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for CWI and FNDF.

Drawdown Indicators

	CWI	FNDF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-60.77%	-40.14%	-20.63%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.47%	-10.60%	-0.87%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.85%	-13.89%	+0.04%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-29.45%	-25.56%	-3.89%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-34.64%	-40.14%	+5.50%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.22%	-0.67%	-0.55%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-12.86%	-7.64%	-5.22%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.95%	2.77%	+0.18%

Volatility

CWI vs. FNDF - Volatility Comparison

SPDR MSCI ACWI ex-US ETF (CWI) has a higher volatility of 5.81% compared to Schwab Fundamental International Large Company Index ETF (FNDF) at 5.26%. This indicates that CWI's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FNDF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	CWI	FNDF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.81%	5.26%	+0.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	13.10%	12.53%	+0.57%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.35%	15.06%	+0.29%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.25%	16.18%	+0.07%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.13%	17.67%	-0.54%

CWI vs. FNDF - Expense Ratio Comparison

CWI has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than FNDF's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

CWI vs. FNDF - Dividend Comparison

CWI's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.70%, less than FNDF's 2.84% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
CWI SPDR MSCI ACWI ex-US ETF	2.70%	2.97%	2.89%	2.80%	3.17%	2.65%	2.07%	3.05%	2.81%	2.29%	2.45%	2.62%
FNDF Schwab Fundamental International Large Company Index ETF	2.84%	3.44%	4.01%	3.41%	3.10%	3.54%	2.17%	3.20%	3.47%	2.32%	2.42%	2.08%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both CWI and FNDF in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.94, CWI and FNDF 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, CWI or FNDF?

CWI has higher volatility (5.81%) compared to FNDF (5.26%). In terms of maximum drawdown, CWI dropped -60.77% vs FNDF's -40.14%.

Which ETF is better, CWI or FNDF?

On 10-year performance, FNDF leads with 11.93% vs 9.91% for CWI. On fees, FNDF is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, FNDF has been the lower-risk option at 5.26%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, CWI or FNDF?

Over the 10-year period, FNDF has performed better with a 11.93% return vs 9.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, CWI or FNDF?

FNDF is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.30% for CWI.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, CWI or FNDF?

FNDF has the higher dividend yield at 2.84%, compared with 2.70% for CWI.

What is the main difference between CWI and FNDF?

CWI tracks MSCI All Country World ex-U.S. Index, while FNDF tracks Russell Fundamental Developed ex-U.S. Large Company Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for CWI and 0.25% for FNDF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FNDF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.99 vs 2.10), 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.