FNDA vs. FNDF

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FNDA (Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF) and FNDF (Schwab Fundamental International Large Company Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FNDA is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Russell RAFI Small Company US, while FNDF is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the Russell Fundamental Developed ex-U.S. Large Company Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FNDA returned 10.87%/yr vs 11.93%/yr for FNDF. A 0.74 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. Both charge a 0.25% expense ratio.

Performance

FNDA vs. FNDF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF (FNDA) 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, FNDA achieves a 14.87% return, which is significantly lower than FNDF's 21.21% return. Over the past 10 years, FNDA has underperformed FNDF with an annualized return of 10.87%, while FNDF has yielded a comparatively higher 11.93% annualized return.

FNDA

• 1D: -1.01%
• 1M: 2.29%
• YTD: 14.87%
• 6M: 14.27%
• 1Y: 30.96%
• 3Y*: 15.77%
• 5Y*: 7.06%
• 10Y*: 10.87%

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)

FNDA vs. FNDF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FNDA Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF	14.87%	7.44%	9.00%	20.29%	-14.83%	31.12%	8.44%	24.34%	-12.12%	12.68%
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 FNDA and FNDF is 0.69, 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	0.69
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.69
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.75
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.74
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 16, 2013	0.74

The correlation between FNDA and FNDF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

FNDA vs. FNDF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FNDA	FNDF
Industrials	18.9%	15.9%
Technology	14.9%	11.1%
Financial Services	14.6%	16.7%
Consumer Cyclical	12.2%	10.7%
Real Estate	9.9%	0.9%
Healthcare	6.8%	5.5%
Energy	6.2%	12.3%
Basic Materials	5.2%	11.3%
Consumer Defensive	4.2%	6.9%
Communication Services	4.1%	4.9%
Utilities	2.8%	3.8%

Return for Risk

FNDA vs. FNDF — Risk / Return Rank

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

FNDA

FNDA Risk / Return Rank: 56
FNDA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 52
FNDA Sortino Ratio Rank: 54
FNDA Omega Ratio Rank: 49
FNDA Calmar Ratio Rank: 66
FNDA 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.

FNDA vs. FNDF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF (FNDA) 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.

	FNDA	FNDF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.82	2.99	-1.17
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.63	3.89	-1.25
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.53	-0.22
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.32	4.24	-0.92
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.73	16.19	-5.46
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FNDA vs. FNDF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNDA Sharpe Ratio is 1.82, which is lower than the FNDF Sharpe Ratio of 2.99. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNDA 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

	FNDA	FNDF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.82	2.99	-1.17
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.34	0.83	-0.49
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.49	0.68	-0.19
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.49	0.54	-0.05

Drawdowns

FNDA vs. FNDF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNDA drawdown since its inception was -44.64%, which is greater than FNDF's maximum drawdown of -40.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNDA and FNDF.

Drawdown Indicators

	FNDA	FNDF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.64%	-40.14%	-4.50%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.36%	-10.60%	+1.24%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.92%	-13.89%	-12.03%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.92%	-25.56%	-0.36%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-44.64%	-40.14%	-4.50%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.01%	-0.67%	-0.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.69%	-7.64%	+0.95%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.89%	2.77%	+0.12%

Volatility

FNDA vs. FNDF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF (FNDA) is 4.38%, while Schwab Fundamental International Large Company Index ETF (FNDF) has a volatility of 5.26%. This indicates that FNDA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FNDF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FNDA	FNDF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.38%	5.26%	-0.88%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.79%	12.53%	-0.74%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.13%	15.06%	+2.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.89%	16.18%	+4.71%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.37%	17.67%	+4.70%

FNDA vs. FNDF - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FNDA and FNDF have an expense ratio of 0.25%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FNDA vs. FNDF - Dividend Comparison

FNDA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.09%, less than FNDF's 2.84% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FNDA Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF	1.09%	1.22%	1.53%	1.37%	1.38%	1.15%	1.31%	1.38%	1.64%	1.30%	1.18%	1.33%
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 FNDA and FNDF in my portfolio?

FNDA and FNDF have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FNDA or FNDF?

FNDF has higher volatility (5.26%) compared to FNDA (4.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNDA dropped -44.64% vs FNDF's -40.14%.

Which ETF is better, FNDA or FNDF?

On 10-year performance, FNDF leads with 11.93% vs 10.87% for FNDA. Both ETFs have the same 0.25% expense ratio. On volatility, FNDA has been the lower-risk option at 4.38%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FNDA or FNDF?

Over the 10-year period, FNDF has performed better with a 11.93% return vs 10.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FNDA or FNDF?

FNDA and FNDF have the same expense ratio: 0.25% per year.

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

FNDF has the higher dividend yield at 2.84%, compared with 1.09% for FNDA.

What is the main difference between FNDA and FNDF?

FNDA is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while FNDF is Foreign Large Cap Equities. FNDA tracks Russell RAFI Small Company US, while FNDF tracks Russell Fundamental Developed ex-U.S. Large Company Index.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FNDF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.99 vs 1.82), 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.