PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FNDA vs. FNDF
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

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 Equity ETF (FNDF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FNDA achieves a 17.96% return, which is significantly higher than FNDF's 15.75% return. Over the past 10 years, FNDA has underperformed FNDF with an annualized return of 11.49%, while FNDF has yielded a comparatively higher 12.10% annualized return.


FNDA

1D
0.79%
1M
3.92%
YTD
17.96%
6M
15.68%
1Y
31.65%
3Y*
16.90%
5Y*
7.55%
10Y*
11.49%

FNDF

1D
-0.59%
1M
-1.95%
YTD
15.75%
6M
15.75%
1Y
36.76%
3Y*
22.21%
5Y*
12.77%
10Y*
12.10%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FNDA vs. FNDF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FNDA
Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF
17.96%7.44%9.00%20.29%-14.83%31.12%8.44%24.34%-12.12%12.68%
FNDF
Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF
15.75%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

0.70

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.74

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.74

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 15, 2013

0.74

The correlation between FNDA and FNDF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.74 - a consistent structural relationship.

FNDA vs. FNDF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FNDA
FNDF

Industrials

19.3%
15.5%

Technology

16.2%
14.4%

Financial Services

14.1%
16.2%

Consumer Cyclical

12.2%
10.8%

Real Estate

9.8%
0.8%

Healthcare

7.1%
5.2%

Energy

5.5%
10.9%

Basic Materials

5.2%
11.3%

Communication Services

4.0%
4.9%

Consumer Defensive

3.9%
6.5%

Utilities

2.7%
3.5%

Industrials

FNDA
19.3%
FNDF
15.5%

Technology

FNDA
16.2%
FNDF
14.4%

Financial Services

FNDA
14.1%
FNDF
16.2%

Consumer Cyclical

FNDA
12.2%
FNDF
10.8%

Real Estate

FNDA
9.8%
FNDF
0.8%

Healthcare

FNDA
7.1%
FNDF
5.2%

Energy

FNDA
5.5%
FNDF
10.9%

Basic Materials

FNDA
5.2%
FNDF
11.3%

Communication Services

FNDA
4.0%
FNDF
4.9%

Consumer Defensive

FNDA
3.9%
FNDF
6.5%

Utilities

FNDA
2.7%
FNDF
3.5%

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

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: 6565
Overall Rank
FNDA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6161
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FNDA Sortino Ratio Rank: 6565
Sortino Ratio Rank
FNDA Omega Ratio Rank: 5757
Omega Ratio Rank
FNDA Calmar Ratio Rank: 7474
Calmar Ratio Rank
FNDA Martin Ratio Rank: 6767
Martin Ratio Rank

FNDF
FNDF Risk / Return Rank: 7777
Overall Rank
FNDF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FNDF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7575
Sortino Ratio Rank
FNDF Omega Ratio Rank: 7979
Omega Ratio Rank
FNDF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
FNDF Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
Martin Ratio Rank
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 Equity 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.

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.


FNDAFNDFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.46

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.35

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.41

-0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.40

3.49

-0.09

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

10.99

12.85

-1.86

FNDA vs. FNDF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNDA Sharpe Ratio is 1.83, which is comparable to the FNDF Sharpe Ratio of 2.29. 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.


Loading charts...

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.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FNDAFNDFDifference

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

-0.35%

-5.15%

+4.80%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.67%

-7.62%

+0.95%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.89%

2.87%

+0.02%

Volatility

FNDA vs. FNDF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF (FNDA) is 4.97%, while Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) has a volatility of 6.78%. 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.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FNDAFNDFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.97%

6.78%

-1.81%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.23%

13.95%

-1.72%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.37%

16.17%

+1.20%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.89%

16.36%

+4.53%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.36%

17.46%

+4.90%

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 1.06%, less than FNDF's 2.97% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FNDA
Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF
1.06%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 Equity ETF
2.97%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


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.

FNDF has higher volatility (6.78%) compared to FNDA (4.97%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNDA dropped -44.64% vs FNDF's -40.14%.

On 10-year performance, FNDF leads with 12.10% vs 11.49% for FNDA. Both ETFs have the same 0.25% expense ratio. On volatility, FNDA has been the lower-risk option at 4.97%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FNDF has performed better with a 12.10% return vs 11.49%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

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

FNDF has the higher dividend yield at 2.97%, compared with 1.06% for FNDA.

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 RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity Developed ex US Large Index (Net).

FNDF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.29 vs 1.83), 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 FNDA and FNDF

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