FNDA vs. IWM

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FNDA (Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF) and IWM (iShares Russell 2000 ETF) are both Small Cap Blend Equities funds - FNDA tracks the Russell RAFI Small Company US while IWM tracks the Russell 2000 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FNDA returned 10.87%/yr vs 10.93%/yr for IWM. With a 0.96 correlation, they move nearly in lockstep. FNDA charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.19%/yr for IWM.

Performance

FNDA vs. IWM - 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 Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). 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 IWM's 17.07% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with FNDA having a 10.87% annualized return and IWM not far ahead at 10.93%.

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%

IWM

• 1D: -1.37%
• 1M: 3.52%
• YTD: 17.07%
• 6M: 15.83%
• 1Y: 39.10%
• 3Y*: 17.88%
• 5Y*: 6.11%
• 10Y*: 10.93%

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

FNDA vs. IWM - 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%
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	17.07%	12.66%	11.38%	16.83%	-20.48%	14.54%	20.03%	25.39%	-11.12%	14.58%

Correlation

The correlation between FNDA and IWM is 0.93, 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	0.93
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.96
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.96
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.96
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 16, 2013	0.96

The correlation between FNDA and IWM has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.93 to 0.96 - a consistent structural relationship.

FNDA vs. IWM - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FNDA	IWM
Industrials	18.9%	17.1%
Technology	14.9%	19.5%
Financial Services	14.6%	15.8%
Consumer Cyclical	12.2%	7.8%
Real Estate	9.9%	5.7%
Healthcare	6.8%	15.8%
Energy	6.2%	6.0%
Basic Materials	5.2%	4.5%
Consumer Defensive	4.2%	2.1%
Communication Services	4.1%	2.0%
Utilities	2.8%	3.0%

Return for Risk

FNDA vs. IWM — 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

IWM

IWM Risk / Return Rank: 62
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 59
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 59
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 53
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 67

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. IWM - 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 Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). 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	IWM	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.82	2.05	-0.23
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.63	2.85	-0.22
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.34	-0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.32	3.56	-0.24
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.73	12.64	-1.91
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. IWM - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNDA Sharpe Ratio is 1.82, which is comparable to the IWM Sharpe Ratio of 2.05. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNDA and IWM, 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	IWM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.82	2.05	-0.23
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.34	0.27	+0.07
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.49	0.48	+0.01
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.49	0.37	+0.12

Drawdowns

FNDA vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNDA drawdown since its inception was -44.64%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNDA and IWM.

Drawdown Indicators

	FNDA	IWM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.64%	-59.05%	+14.41%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.36%	-11.03%	+1.67%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.92%	-27.50%	+1.58%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.92%	-31.91%	+5.99%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-44.64%	-41.13%	-3.51%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.01%	-1.49%	+0.48%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.69%	-10.77%	+4.08%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.89%	3.10%	-0.21%

Volatility

FNDA vs. IWM - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF (FNDA) is 4.38%, while iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) has a volatility of 5.75%. This indicates that FNDA experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than IWM based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FNDA	IWM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.38%	5.75%	-1.37%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.79%	13.53%	-1.74%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.13%	19.20%	-2.07%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.89%	22.52%	-1.63%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.37%	23.04%	-0.67%

FNDA vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNDA has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

Dividends

FNDA vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

FNDA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.09%, more than IWM's 0.88% 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%
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	0.88%	1.04%	1.15%	1.35%	1.48%	0.94%	1.04%	1.26%	1.40%	1.26%	1.38%	1.54%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FNDA and IWM in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.93, FNDA and IWM 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, FNDA or IWM?

IWM has higher volatility (5.75%) compared to FNDA (4.38%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNDA dropped -44.64% vs IWM's -59.05%.

Which ETF is better, FNDA or IWM?

On 10-year performance, IWM leads with 10.93% vs 10.87% for FNDA. On fees, IWM is cheaper at 0.19% per year. 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 IWM?

Over the 10-year period, IWM has performed better with a 10.93% 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 IWM?

IWM is cheaper with a 0.19% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for FNDA.

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

FNDA has the higher dividend yield at 1.09%, compared with 0.88% for IWM.

What is the main difference between FNDA and IWM?

FNDA tracks Russell RAFI Small Company US, while IWM tracks Russell 2000 Index. They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for FNDA and 0.19% for IWM.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

IWM currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.05 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.