PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FNDB vs. ILCV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FNDB vs. ILCV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab Fundamental U.S. Broad Market Index ETF (FNDB) and iShares Morningstar Value ETF (ILCV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FNDB achieves a 14.46% return, which is significantly higher than ILCV's 7.75% return. Over the past 10 years, FNDB has outperformed ILCV with an annualized return of 14.02%, while ILCV has yielded a comparatively lower 11.68% annualized return.


FNDB

1D
-0.15%
1M
3.71%
YTD
14.46%
6M
14.53%
1Y
32.19%
3Y*
20.54%
5Y*
12.39%
10Y*
14.02%

ILCV

1D
-0.44%
1M
2.76%
YTD
7.75%
6M
7.41%
1Y
26.58%
3Y*
18.61%
5Y*
11.42%
10Y*
11.68%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FNDB vs. ILCV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FNDB
Schwab Fundamental U.S. Broad Market Index ETF
14.46%16.23%16.25%18.42%-7.53%31.55%9.40%28.88%-8.20%16.94%
ILCV
iShares Morningstar Value ETF
7.75%18.79%17.03%14.43%-7.02%26.71%-0.84%25.19%-6.24%15.00%

Correlation

The correlation between FNDB and ILCV is 0.94, 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

0.94

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

0.97

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

0.98

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

0.95

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 16, 2013

0.95

The correlation between FNDB and ILCV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.98 - a consistent structural relationship.

FNDB vs. ILCV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FNDB
ILCV

Technology

18.8%
23.8%

Financial Services

14.1%
16.5%

Healthcare

11.6%
11.5%

Industrials

10.0%
8.8%

Energy

10.0%
6.0%

Communication Services

9.7%
8.0%

Consumer Cyclical

9.4%
9.5%

Consumer Defensive

7.2%
7.6%

Basic Materials

3.8%
2.4%

Utilities

3.1%
3.5%

Real Estate

2.4%
2.0%

Technology

FNDB
18.8%
ILCV
23.8%

Financial Services

FNDB
14.1%
ILCV
16.5%

Healthcare

FNDB
11.6%
ILCV
11.5%

Industrials

FNDB
10.0%
ILCV
8.8%

Energy

FNDB
10.0%
ILCV
6.0%

Communication Services

FNDB
9.7%
ILCV
8.0%

Consumer Cyclical

FNDB
9.4%
ILCV
9.5%

Consumer Defensive

FNDB
7.2%
ILCV
7.6%

Basic Materials

FNDB
3.8%
ILCV
2.4%

Utilities

FNDB
3.1%
ILCV
3.5%

Real Estate

FNDB
2.4%
ILCV
2.0%

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

FNDB vs. ILCV — Risk / Return Rank

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

FNDB
FNDB Risk / Return Rank: 8888
Overall Rank
FNDB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FNDB Sortino Ratio Rank: 8989
Sortino Ratio Rank
FNDB Omega Ratio Rank: 8787
Omega Ratio Rank
FNDB Calmar Ratio Rank: 8787
Calmar Ratio Rank
FNDB Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
Martin Ratio Rank

ILCV
ILCV Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
ILCV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8282
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ILCV Sortino Ratio Rank: 8484
Sortino Ratio Rank
ILCV Omega Ratio Rank: 8181
Omega Ratio Rank
ILCV Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
ILCV Martin Ratio Rank: 8383
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.

FNDB vs. ILCV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab Fundamental U.S. Broad Market Index ETF (FNDB) and iShares Morningstar Value ETF (ILCV). 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.


FNDBILCVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.30

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.38

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.55

1.50

+0.06

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

5.14

4.08

+1.06

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

19.75

16.87

+2.88

FNDB vs. ILCV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNDB Sharpe Ratio is 3.02, which is comparable to the ILCV Sharpe Ratio of 2.72. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNDB and ILCV, 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...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


FNDBILCVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

3.02

2.72

+0.30

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.81

0.81

0.00

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.81

0.70

+0.10

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.79

0.46

+0.33

Drawdowns

FNDB vs. ILCV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNDB drawdown since its inception was -38.17%, smaller than the maximum ILCV drawdown of -58.63%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNDB and ILCV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FNDBILCVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-38.17%

-58.63%

+20.46%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-6.29%

-6.55%

+0.26%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-16.83%

-14.95%

-1.88%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-19.29%

-18.58%

-0.71%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-38.17%

-35.53%

-2.64%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.15%

-0.60%

+0.45%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.66%

-9.32%

+5.66%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.63%

1.58%

+0.05%

Volatility

FNDB vs. ILCV - Volatility Comparison

Schwab Fundamental U.S. Broad Market Index ETF (FNDB) has a higher volatility of 2.40% compared to iShares Morningstar Value ETF (ILCV) at 2.01%. This indicates that FNDB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than ILCV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FNDBILCVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.40%

2.01%

+0.39%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

7.60%

6.97%

+0.63%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.72%

9.82%

+0.90%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.36%

14.21%

+1.15%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.48%

16.66%

+0.82%

FNDB vs. ILCV - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNDB has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than ILCV's 0.04% 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

FNDB vs. ILCV - Dividend Comparison

FNDB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.44%, less than ILCV's 1.63% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FNDB
Schwab Fundamental U.S. Broad Market Index ETF
1.44%1.62%1.74%1.80%1.98%1.63%2.15%2.23%2.41%1.91%2.06%2.26%
ILCV
iShares Morningstar Value ETF
1.63%1.77%1.99%2.27%2.32%2.01%2.96%2.70%2.93%2.32%2.76%3.01%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.94, FNDB and ILCV 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.

FNDB has higher volatility (2.40%) compared to ILCV (2.01%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNDB dropped -38.17% vs ILCV's -58.63%.

On 10-year performance, FNDB leads with 14.02% vs 11.68% for ILCV. On fees, ILCV is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, ILCV has been the lower-risk option at 2.01%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FNDB has performed better with a 14.02% return vs 11.68%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

ILCV is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for FNDB.

ILCV has the higher dividend yield at 1.63%, compared with 1.44% for FNDB.

FNDB tracks RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity US All Index, while ILCV tracks Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Broad Value Index. They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for FNDB and 0.04% for ILCV.

FNDB currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.02 vs 2.72), 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 FNDB and ILCV

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