FNDC vs. INTF

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

FNDC (Schwab Fundamental International Small Co. Index ETF) and INTF (iShares MSCI Intl Multifactor ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FNDC is a Foreign Small & Mid Cap Equities fund tracking the Russell RAFI Small Company Developed x US, while INTF is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the MSCI World ex USA Diversified Multi-Factor. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FNDC returned 8.64%/yr vs 9.12%/yr for INTF. Their correlation of 0.90 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FNDC charges 0.39%/yr vs 0.30%/yr for INTF.

Performance

FNDC vs. INTF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab Fundamental International Small Co. Index ETF (FNDC) and iShares MSCI Intl Multifactor ETF (INTF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FNDC achieves a 11.83% return, which is significantly higher than INTF's 10.41% return. Over the past 10 years, FNDC has underperformed INTF with an annualized return of 8.64%, while INTF has yielded a comparatively higher 9.12% annualized return.

FNDC

• 1D: 0.42%
• 1M: 0.40%
• YTD: 11.83%
• 6M: 14.14%
• 1Y: 26.84%
• 3Y*: 18.52%
• 5Y*: 7.26%
• 10Y*: 8.64%

INTF

• 1D: 0.85%
• 1M: 1.98%
• YTD: 10.41%
• 6M: 13.21%
• 1Y: 26.00%
• 3Y*: 20.11%
• 5Y*: 9.67%
• 10Y*: 9.12%

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

FNDC vs. INTF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FNDC Schwab Fundamental International Small Co. Index ETF	11.83%	35.65%	1.38%	14.92%	-14.71%	10.26%	6.58%	20.58%	-19.10%	29.22%
INTF iShares MSCI Intl Multifactor ETF	10.41%	35.50%	5.99%	18.25%	-12.31%	11.70%	2.83%	18.46%	-15.87%	28.46%

Correlation

The correlation between FNDC and INTF is 0.91, 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	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.92
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.94
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.93
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 5, 2015	0.90

The correlation between FNDC and INTF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.90 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

FNDC vs. INTF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FNDC	INTF
Industrials	25.8%	19.1%
Consumer Cyclical	12.8%	9.0%
Financial Services	11.5%	25.2%
Basic Materials	11.0%	6.6%
Technology	8.7%	8.5%
Real Estate	6.9%	2.7%
Consumer Defensive	6.3%	6.3%
Healthcare	4.9%	8.2%
Communication Services	4.8%	3.9%
Energy	4.6%	5.9%
Utilities	2.8%	4.7%

Return for Risk

FNDC vs. INTF — Risk / Return Rank

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

FNDC

FNDC Risk / Return Rank: 55
FNDC Sharpe Ratio Rank: 57
FNDC Sortino Ratio Rank: 57
FNDC Omega Ratio Rank: 56
FNDC Calmar Ratio Rank: 49
FNDC Martin Ratio Rank: 53

INTF

INTF Risk / Return Rank: 54
INTF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 54
INTF Sortino Ratio Rank: 53
INTF Omega Ratio Rank: 52
INTF Calmar Ratio Rank: 53
INTF Martin Ratio Rank: 58

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. INTF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab Fundamental International Small Co. Index ETF (FNDC) and iShares MSCI Intl Multifactor ETF (INTF). 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.

	FNDC	INTF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.90	1.80	+0.10
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.68	2.50	+0.18
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.34	1.32	+0.02
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	2.41	2.56	-0.15
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	9.02	10.14	-1.11
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FNDC vs. INTF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNDC Sharpe Ratio is 1.90, which is comparable to the INTF Sharpe Ratio of 1.80. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNDC and INTF, 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

	FNDC	INTF	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	1.90	1.80	+0.10
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.46	0.60	-0.14
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.52	0.53	-0.01
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.50	0.45	+0.05

Drawdowns

FNDC vs. INTF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNDC drawdown since its inception was -43.22%, which is greater than INTF's maximum drawdown of -40.39%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNDC and INTF.

Drawdown Indicators

	FNDC	INTF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-43.22%	-40.39%	-2.83%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-11.20%	-10.20%	-1.00%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-12.98%	-13.64%	+0.66%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-32.13%	-29.26%	-2.87%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-43.22%	-40.39%	-2.83%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-1.68%	-0.19%	-1.49%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-8.45%	-7.69%	-0.76%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.98%	2.57%	+0.41%

Volatility

FNDC vs. INTF - Volatility Comparison

Schwab Fundamental International Small Co. Index ETF (FNDC) and iShares MSCI Intl Multifactor ETF (INTF) have volatilities of 4.55% and 4.42%, 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

	FNDC	INTF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.55%	4.42%	+0.13%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.77%	12.01%	-0.24%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.24%	14.54%	-0.30%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.97%	16.16%	-0.19%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	16.80%	17.35%	-0.55%

FNDC vs. INTF - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNDC has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than INTF's 0.30% expense ratio.

Dividends

FNDC vs. INTF - Dividend Comparison

FNDC's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.45%, more than INTF's 2.60% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FNDC Schwab Fundamental International Small Co. Index ETF	3.45%	3.86%	3.59%	2.86%	1.98%	2.58%	1.77%	2.71%	2.68%	1.94%	1.95%	1.30%
INTF iShares MSCI Intl Multifactor ETF	2.60%	2.87%	3.53%	3.59%	2.81%	5.38%	2.06%	3.65%	2.62%	3.26%	1.66%	0.85%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both FNDC and INTF in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, FNDC and INTF 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, FNDC or INTF?

FNDC has higher volatility (4.55%) compared to INTF (4.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNDC dropped -43.22% vs INTF's -40.39%.

Which ETF is better, FNDC or INTF?

On 10-year performance, INTF leads with 9.12% vs 8.64% for FNDC. On fees, INTF is cheaper at 0.30% per year. On volatility, INTF has been the lower-risk option at 4.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FNDC or INTF?

Over the 10-year period, INTF has performed better with a 9.12% return vs 8.64%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FNDC or INTF?

INTF is cheaper with a 0.30% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for FNDC.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FNDC or INTF?

FNDC has the higher dividend yield at 3.45%, compared with 2.60% for INTF.

What is the main difference between FNDC and INTF?

FNDC is categorized as Foreign Small & Mid Cap Equities, while INTF is Foreign Large Cap Equities. FNDC tracks Russell RAFI Small Company Developed x US, while INTF tracks MSCI World ex USA Diversified Multi-Factor. They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for FNDC and 0.30% for INTF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FNDC currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.90 vs 1.80), 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.