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

Performance

FNDA vs. IGF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF (FNDA) and iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF). 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 17.04% return, which is significantly higher than IGF's 9.67% return. Over the past 10 years, FNDA has outperformed IGF with an annualized return of 11.40%, while IGF has yielded a comparatively lower 8.79% annualized return.


FNDA

1D
-0.46%
1M
3.11%
YTD
17.04%
6M
15.17%
1Y
31.82%
3Y*
16.60%
5Y*
7.48%
10Y*
11.40%

IGF

1D
-0.03%
1M
-0.16%
YTD
9.67%
6M
8.98%
1Y
17.62%
3Y*
16.78%
5Y*
10.70%
10Y*
8.79%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FNDA vs. IGF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FNDA
Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF
17.04%7.44%9.00%20.29%-14.83%31.12%8.44%24.34%-12.12%12.68%
IGF
iShares Global Infrastructure ETF
9.67%21.31%14.81%6.14%-1.26%11.57%-6.50%25.82%-9.95%19.31%

Correlation

The correlation between FNDA and IGF is 0.52, 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

0.52

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.57

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

0.66

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

0.63

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

0.65

The correlation between FNDA and IGF shifts across timeframes, from 0.52 (1 year) to 0.66 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

FNDA vs. IGF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FNDA
IGF

Industrials

19.3%
40.6%

Technology

16.2%

-

Financial Services

14.1%

-

Consumer Cyclical

12.2%

-

Real Estate

9.8%
0.1%

Healthcare

7.1%

-

Energy

5.5%
19.6%

Basic Materials

5.2%

-

Communication Services

4.0%

-

Consumer Defensive

3.9%

-

Utilities

2.7%
39.7%

Industrials

FNDA
19.3%
IGF
40.6%

Technology

FNDA
16.2%
IGF

-

Financial Services

FNDA
14.1%
IGF

-

Consumer Cyclical

FNDA
12.2%
IGF

-

Real Estate

FNDA
9.8%
IGF
0.1%

Healthcare

FNDA
7.1%
IGF

-

Energy

FNDA
5.5%
IGF
19.6%

Basic Materials

FNDA
5.2%
IGF

-

Communication Services

FNDA
4.0%
IGF

-

Consumer Defensive

FNDA
3.9%
IGF

-

Utilities

FNDA
2.7%
IGF
39.7%

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. IGF — Risk / Return Rank

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

FNDA
FNDA Risk / Return Rank: 6060
Overall Rank
FNDA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5757
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FNDA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5959
Sortino Ratio Rank
FNDA Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
FNDA Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
FNDA Martin Ratio Rank: 6464
Martin Ratio Rank

IGF
IGF Risk / Return Rank: 5353
Overall Rank
IGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5151
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 5151
Sortino Ratio Rank
IGF Omega Ratio Rank: 4949
Omega Ratio Rank
IGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
IGF Martin Ratio Rank: 5151
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. IGF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

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


FNDAIGFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.16

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.27

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.32

1.30

+0.02

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.41

3.02

+0.40

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.04

8.52

+2.52

FNDA vs. IGF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNDA Sharpe Ratio is 1.84, which is comparable to the IGF Sharpe Ratio of 1.68. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNDA and IGF, 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. IGF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNDA drawdown since its inception was -44.64%, smaller than the maximum IGF drawdown of -58.33%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNDA and IGF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FNDAIGFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-44.64%

-58.33%

+13.69%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-9.36%

-5.87%

-3.49%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-25.92%

-14.28%

-11.64%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.92%

-20.83%

-5.09%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-44.64%

-42.11%

-2.53%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.13%

-2.99%

+1.86%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-6.67%

-11.84%

+5.17%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.89%

2.07%

+0.82%

Volatility

FNDA vs. IGF - Volatility Comparison

Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF (FNDA) has a higher volatility of 4.97% compared to iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) at 3.35%. This indicates that FNDA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than IGF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FNDAIGFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.97%

3.35%

+1.62%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

12.21%

8.73%

+3.48%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.38%

10.56%

+6.82%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

20.89%

13.96%

+6.93%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.36%

16.73%

+5.63%

FNDA vs. IGF - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNDA has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than IGF's 0.39% expense ratio.


Dividends

FNDA vs. IGF - Dividend Comparison

FNDA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.07%, less than IGF's 2.91% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FNDA
Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF
1.07%1.22%1.53%1.37%1.38%1.15%1.31%1.38%1.64%1.30%1.18%1.33%
IGF
iShares Global Infrastructure ETF
2.91%3.23%3.21%3.36%2.67%2.42%2.33%3.27%3.52%2.95%2.98%3.25%

Frequently Asked Questions


FNDA and IGF have a correlation of 0.52, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FNDA has higher volatility (4.97%) compared to IGF (3.35%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNDA dropped -44.64% vs IGF's -58.33%.

On 10-year performance, FNDA leads with 11.40% vs 8.79% for IGF. On fees, FNDA is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, IGF has been the lower-risk option at 3.35%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FNDA has performed better with a 11.40% return vs 8.79%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FNDA is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for IGF.

IGF has the higher dividend yield at 2.91%, compared with 1.07% for FNDA.

FNDA is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while IGF is Industrials Equities. FNDA tracks Russell RAFI Small Company US, while IGF tracks S&P Global Infrastructure Index (Net). They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for FNDA and 0.39% for IGF.

FNDA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.84 vs 1.68), 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 IGF

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