FNDA vs. RB

Last updated Jul 17, 2026

FNDA (Schwab Fundamental U.S. Small Company ETF) and RB (ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer 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 RB is a Defined Outcome fund tracking the Russell 2000. Both are passively managed. Over the past year, FNDA returned 30.96% vs 18.24% for RB. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FNDA charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.58%/yr for RB.

Performance

FNDA vs. RB - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab Fundamental U.S. Small Company ETF (FNDA) and ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FNDA achieves a 20.82% return, which is significantly higher than RB's 7.90% return.

FNDA

• 1D: 0.91%
• 1M: 2.67%
• 6M: 12.04%
• YTD: 20.82%
• 1Y: 30.96%
• 3Y*: 14.92%
• 5Y*: 9.51%
• 10Y*: 11.01%

RB

• 1D: -0.15%
• 1M: 1.02%
• 6M: 5.39%
• YTD: 7.90%
• 1Y: 18.24%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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

FNDA vs. RB - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
FNDA Schwab Fundamental U.S. Small Company ETF	20.82%	12.58%
RB ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF	7.90%	10.85%

Correlation

The correlation between FNDA and RB is 0.70, 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	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jun 26, 2025	0.71

The correlation between FNDA and RB has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.70 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

FNDA vs. RB — Risk / Return Rank

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

FNDA

FNDA Risk / Return Rank: 73
FNDA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 71
FNDA Sortino Ratio Rank: 74
FNDA Omega Ratio Rank: 66
FNDA Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
FNDA Martin Ratio Rank: 74

RB

RB Risk / Return Rank: 96
RB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 94
RB Sortino Ratio Rank: 96
RB Omega Ratio Rank: 95
RB Calmar Ratio Rank: 97
RB Martin Ratio Rank: 96

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. RB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab Fundamental U.S. Small Company ETF (FNDA) and ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB). 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	RB	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.82	2.79	-0.97
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.65	4.74	-2.09
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.32	1.61	-0.29
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.32	8.77	-5.44
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	10.73	28.21	-17.48

FNDA vs. RB - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNDA Sharpe Ratio is 1.82, which is lower than the RB Sharpe Ratio of 2.79. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNDA and RB, 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. RB - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNDA drawdown since its inception was -44.64%, which is greater than RB's maximum drawdown of -2.09%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNDA and RB.

Drawdown Indicators

	FNDA	RB	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.64%	-2.09%	-42.55%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.36%	-2.09%	-7.27%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-25.92%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.92%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-44.64%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.42%	-0.54%	+0.12%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-6.64%	-0.44%	-6.20%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.89%	0.65%	+2.24%

Volatility

FNDA vs. RB - Volatility Comparison

Schwab Fundamental U.S. Small Company ETF (FNDA) has a higher volatility of 3.81% compared to ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF (RB) at 1.54%. This indicates that FNDA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RB based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FNDA	RB	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	3.81%	1.54%	+2.27%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.11%	4.74%	+7.37%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	17.07%	6.57%	+10.50%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	20.81%	6.46%	+14.35%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	22.31%	6.46%	+15.85%

FNDA vs. RB - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNDA has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than RB's 0.58% expense ratio.

Dividends

FNDA vs. RB - Dividend Comparison

FNDA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.10%, less than RB's 2.27% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FNDA Schwab Fundamental U.S. Small Company ETF	1.10%	1.22%	1.53%	1.37%	1.38%	1.15%	1.31%	1.38%	1.64%	1.30%	1.18%	1.33%
RB ProShares Russell 2000 Dynamic Daily Buffer ETF	2.27%	1.78%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FNDA and RB in my portfolio?

FNDA and RB have a correlation of 0.70, 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 RB?

FNDA has higher volatility (3.81%) compared to RB (1.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNDA dropped -44.64% vs RB's -2.09%.

Which ETF is better, FNDA or RB?

On 1-year performance, FNDA leads with 30.96% vs 18.24% for RB. On fees, FNDA is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, RB has been the lower-risk option at 1.54%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FNDA or RB?

Over the 1-year period, FNDA has performed better with a 30.96% return vs 18.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FNDA or RB?

FNDA is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.58% for RB.

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

RB has the higher dividend yield at 2.27%, compared with 1.10% for FNDA.

What is the main difference between FNDA and RB?

FNDA is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while RB is Defined Outcome. FNDA tracks RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity U.S. Small Index, while RB tracks Russell 2000. They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and ProShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for FNDA and 0.58% for RB.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

RB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.79 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.