FNDA vs. LRGF

Last updated Aug 2, 2026

FNDA (Schwab Fundamental U.S. Small Company ETF) and LRGF (iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FNDA is a Small Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity U.S. Small Index, while LRGF is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the STOXX U.S. Equity Factor Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FNDA returned 10.90%/yr vs 13.82%/yr for LRGF. Their correlation of 0.83 means they have usually moved in the same direction. FNDA charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.08%/yr for LRGF.

Performance

FNDA vs. LRGF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab Fundamental U.S. Small Company ETF (FNDA) and iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF (LRGF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FNDA achieves a 18.48% return, which is significantly higher than LRGF's 10.17% return. Over the past 10 years, FNDA has underperformed LRGF with an annualized return of 10.90%, while LRGF has yielded a comparatively higher 13.82% annualized return.

FNDA

• 1D: -0.09%
• 1M: -1.21%
• 6M: 11.94%
• YTD: 18.48%
• 1Y: 30.92%
• 3Y*: 13.16%
• 5Y*: 8.52%
• 10Y*: 10.90%
• ALL TIME*: 10.34%

LRGF

• 1D: 0.71%
• 1M: 1.00%
• 6M: 9.84%
• YTD: 10.17%
• 1Y: 19.37%
• 3Y*: 19.82%
• 5Y*: 13.36%
• 10Y*: 13.82%
• ALL TIME*: 12.32%

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

Liquidity Comparison

Position	Avg. Volume Value (2W)	Avg. Volume Value (1M)	Avg. Volume Value (3M)
FNDA Schwab Fundamental U.S. Small Company ETF	$15.42M	$15.07M	$42.17M
LRGF iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF	$10.71M	$10.50M	$11.75M

FNDA vs. LRGF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FNDA Schwab Fundamental U.S. Small Company ETF	18.48%	7.44%	9.00%	20.29%	-14.83%	31.12%	8.44%	24.34%	-12.12%	12.68%
LRGF iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF	10.17%	16.48%	26.59%	25.85%	-14.77%	25.01%	11.11%	26.11%	-9.66%	21.13%

Correlation

The correlation between FNDA and LRGF is 0.74, which is moderate. They have sometimes moved together and sometimes differently, sharing some price drivers without tracking each other closely.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.	0.74
Correlation (3Y) Balances recent behavior with more history.	0.78
Correlation (5Y) Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.	0.83
Correlation (10Y) Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 30, 2015	0.83

The correlation between FNDA and LRGF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.74 to 0.84 - a consistent structural relationship.

FNDA vs. LRGF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FNDA	LRGF
Industrials	18.6%	8.3%
Financial Services	15.5%	11.7%
Technology	14.6%	37.3%
Consumer Cyclical	11.7%	10.5%
Real Estate	10.2%	1.1%
Healthcare	7.7%	9.4%
Energy	5.6%	3.1%
Basic Materials	5.1%	1.8%
Consumer Defensive	4.2%	4.9%
Communication Services	3.8%	10.0%
Utilities	2.7%	2.0%

Return for Risk

FNDA vs. LRGF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

FNDA

FNDA Risk / Return Rank: 78
FNDA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 75
FNDA Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
FNDA Omega Ratio Rank: 72
FNDA Calmar Ratio Rank: 83
FNDA Martin Ratio Rank: 79

LRGF

LRGF Risk / Return Rank: 57
LRGF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
LRGF Sortino Ratio Rank: 56
LRGF Omega Ratio Rank: 54
LRGF Calmar Ratio Rank: 56
LRGF Martin Ratio Rank: 64

The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

FNDA vs. LRGF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab Fundamental U.S. Small Company ETF (FNDA) and iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF (LRGF). 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.

	FNDA	LRGF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.71	1.36	+0.35
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.51	1.91	+0.59
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.30	1.24	+0.06
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.10	1.97	+1.12
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.14	7.67	+2.47

FNDA vs. LRGF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNDA Sharpe Ratio is 1.71, which is comparable to the LRGF Sharpe Ratio of 1.36. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNDA and LRGF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

FNDA vs. LRGF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNDA drawdown since its inception was -44.64%, which is greater than LRGF's maximum drawdown of -36.03%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNDA and LRGF.

Drawdown Indicators

	FNDA	LRGF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.64%	-36.03%	-8.61%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.36%	-8.92%	-0.44%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.92%	-19.44%	-6.48%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.92%	-21.62%	-4.30%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-44.64%	-36.03%	-8.61%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.35%	-1.01%	-1.34%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.62%	-4.50%	-2.12%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.86%	2.29%	+0.57%

Volatility

FNDA vs. LRGF - Volatility Comparison

Schwab Fundamental U.S. Small Company ETF (FNDA) and iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF (LRGF) have volatilities of 3.40% and 3.52%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FNDA	LRGF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.40%	3.52%	-0.12%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.81%	10.08%	+1.73%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.02%	12.89%	+4.13%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.71%	17.09%	+3.62%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.31%	18.30%	+4.01%

FNDA vs. LRGF - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNDA has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than LRGF's 0.08% 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. LRGF - Dividend Comparison

FNDA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.12%, more than LRGF's 1.08% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FNDA Schwab Fundamental U.S. Small Company ETF	1.12%	1.22%	1.53%	1.37%	1.38%	1.15%	1.31%	1.38%	1.64%	1.30%	1.18%	1.33%
LRGF iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF	1.08%	1.16%	1.23%	1.49%	1.78%	1.05%	1.35%	1.76%	3.27%	1.68%	1.56%	0.83%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FNDA and LRGF in my portfolio?

FNDA and LRGF have a correlation of 0.74, 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 LRGF?

LRGF has higher volatility (3.52%) compared to FNDA (3.40%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNDA dropped -44.64% vs LRGF's -36.03%.

Which ETF is better, FNDA or LRGF?

On 10-year performance, LRGF leads with 13.82% vs 10.90% for FNDA. On fees, LRGF is cheaper at 0.08% per year. On volatility, FNDA has been the lower-risk option at 3.40%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FNDA or LRGF?

Over the 10-year period, LRGF has performed better with a 13.82% return vs 10.90%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FNDA or LRGF?

LRGF is cheaper with a 0.08% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for FNDA.

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

FNDA has the higher dividend yield at 1.12%, compared with 1.08% for LRGF.

What is the main difference between FNDA and LRGF?

FNDA is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while LRGF is Large Cap Blend Equities. FNDA tracks RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity U.S. Small Index, while LRGF tracks STOXX U.S. Equity Factor Index. They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for FNDA and 0.08% for LRGF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FNDA currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.71 vs 1.36), 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.