PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FNDC vs. CGV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FNDC vs. CGV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab Fundamental International Small Co. Index ETF (FNDC) and Conductor Global Equity Value ETF (CGV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FNDC achieves a 11.36% return, which is significantly lower than CGV's 12.00% return.


FNDC

1D
-0.64%
1M
1.12%
YTD
11.36%
6M
13.51%
1Y
27.62%
3Y*
18.14%
5Y*
7.17%
10Y*
8.66%

CGV

1D
-1.42%
1M
-0.01%
YTD
12.00%
6M
14.03%
1Y
27.77%
3Y*
12.42%
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FNDC vs. CGV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)2025202420232022
FNDC
Schwab Fundamental International Small Co. Index ETF
11.36%35.65%1.38%14.92%-1.28%
CGV
Conductor Global Equity Value ETF
12.00%23.11%-3.34%5.72%3.44%

Correlation

The correlation between FNDC and CGV is 0.86, 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

0.86

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

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 2, 2022

0.84

The correlation between FNDC and CGV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.84 to 0.87 - a consistent structural relationship.

FNDC vs. CGV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FNDC
CGV

Industrials

25.8%
14.9%

Consumer Cyclical

12.8%
10.1%

Financial Services

11.5%
4.9%

Basic Materials

11.0%
21.1%

Technology

8.7%
9.3%

Real Estate

6.9%
1.3%

Consumer Defensive

6.3%
14.3%

Healthcare

4.9%
5.3%

Communication Services

4.8%
2.2%

Energy

4.6%
12.7%

Utilities

2.8%
3.9%

Industrials

FNDC
25.8%
CGV
14.9%

Consumer Cyclical

FNDC
12.8%
CGV
10.1%

Financial Services

FNDC
11.5%
CGV
4.9%

Basic Materials

FNDC
11.0%
CGV
21.1%

Technology

FNDC
8.7%
CGV
9.3%

Real Estate

FNDC
6.9%
CGV
1.3%

Consumer Defensive

FNDC
6.3%
CGV
14.3%

Healthcare

FNDC
4.9%
CGV
5.3%

Communication Services

FNDC
4.8%
CGV
2.2%

Energy

FNDC
4.6%
CGV
12.7%

Utilities

FNDC
2.8%
CGV
3.9%

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

FNDC vs. CGV — Risk / Return Rank

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

FNDC
FNDC Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
FNDC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5656
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FNDC Sortino Ratio Rank: 5757
Sortino Ratio Rank
FNDC Omega Ratio Rank: 5656
Omega Ratio Rank
FNDC Calmar Ratio Rank: 4949
Calmar Ratio Rank
FNDC Martin Ratio Rank: 5353
Martin Ratio Rank

CGV
CGV Risk / Return Rank: 5454
Overall Rank
CGV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5959
Sharpe Ratio Rank
CGV Sortino Ratio Rank: 5656
Sortino Ratio Rank
CGV Omega Ratio Rank: 5858
Omega Ratio Rank
CGV Calmar Ratio Rank: 4747
Calmar Ratio Rank
CGV Martin Ratio Rank: 5050
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.

FNDC vs. CGV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab Fundamental International Small Co. Index ETF (FNDC) and Conductor Global Equity Value ETF (CGV). 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.


FNDCCGVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.03

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.10

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.35

1.35

0.00

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.48

2.30

+0.18

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.29

8.42

+0.87

FNDC vs. CGV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNDC Sharpe Ratio is 1.95, which is comparable to the CGV Sharpe Ratio of 1.98. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNDC and CGV, 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


FNDCCGVDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.95

1.98

-0.03

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.45

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.52

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.50

0.77

-0.27

Drawdowns

FNDC vs. CGV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNDC drawdown since its inception was -43.22%, which is greater than CGV's maximum drawdown of -16.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNDC and CGV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FNDCCGVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-43.22%

-16.64%

-26.58%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.20%

-12.13%

+0.93%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.98%

-16.64%

+3.66%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-32.13%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-43.22%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.09%

-3.75%

+1.66%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.45%

-3.65%

-4.80%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.98%

3.31%

-0.33%

Volatility

FNDC vs. CGV - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Schwab Fundamental International Small Co. Index ETF (FNDC) is 4.67%, while Conductor Global Equity Value ETF (CGV) has a volatility of 5.19%. This indicates that FNDC experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than CGV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FNDCCGVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.67%

5.19%

-0.52%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.77%

11.66%

+0.11%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.26%

14.08%

+0.18%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

15.98%

13.53%

+2.45%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

16.80%

13.53%

+3.27%

FNDC vs. CGV - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNDC has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is lower than CGV's 1.25% expense ratio.


Dividends

FNDC vs. CGV - Dividend Comparison

FNDC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.46%, less than CGV's 4.90% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
CGV
Conductor Global Equity Value ETF
4.90%4.58%2.87%4.56%0.71%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
FNDC
Schwab Fundamental International Small Co. Index ETF
3.46%3.86%3.59%2.86%1.98%2.58%1.77%2.71%2.68%1.94%1.95%1.30%

Frequently Asked Questions


FNDC and CGV have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

CGV has higher volatility (5.19%) compared to FNDC (4.67%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNDC dropped -43.22% vs CGV's -16.64%.

On 3-year performance, FNDC leads with 18.14% vs 12.42% for CGV. On fees, FNDC is cheaper at 0.39% per year. On volatility, FNDC has been the lower-risk option at 4.67%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, FNDC has performed better with a 18.14% return vs 12.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FNDC is cheaper with a 0.39% expense ratio, compared with 1.25% for CGV.

CGV has the higher dividend yield at 4.90%, compared with 3.46% for FNDC.

They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and Conductor Fund. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for FNDC and 1.25% for CGV.

CGV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.98 vs 1.95), 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 FNDC and CGV

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