PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
FNDF vs. DFIV
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

FNDF vs. DFIV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) and Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FNDF achieves a 20.14% return, which is significantly higher than DFIV's 16.68% return.


FNDF

1D
-0.59%
1M
2.41%
6M
11.85%
YTD
20.14%
1Y
40.23%
3Y*
21.76%
5Y*
14.24%
10Y*
11.86%
ALL TIME*
9.07%

DFIV

1D
-0.47%
1M
4.37%
6M
10.06%
YTD
16.68%
1Y
37.44%
3Y*
23.26%
5Y*
10Y*
ALL TIME*
16.12%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$76.53M$67.72M$67.89M
$75.61M$73.89M$78.20M

FNDF vs. DFIV - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)20252024202320222021
FNDF
Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF
20.14%40.99%2.29%20.22%-7.78%0.32%
DFIV
Dimensional International Value ETF
16.68%45.36%7.26%17.75%-3.70%0.50%

Correlation

The correlation between FNDF and DFIV is 0.92, meaning they have usually moved in the same direction, including during past declines.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.92

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.96

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 13, 2021

0.97

The correlation between FNDF and DFIV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.92 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

FNDF vs. DFIV - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FNDF
DFIV

Financial Services

20.2%
34.3%

Industrials

12.8%
9.8%

Technology

11.5%
3.1%

Energy

10.6%
14.1%

Basic Materials

10.0%
10.5%

Consumer Cyclical

8.2%
9.7%

Consumer Defensive

6.2%
5.2%

Healthcare

6.0%
5.4%

Utilities

4.3%
2.3%

Communication Services

3.4%
4.0%

Real Estate

0.9%
1.7%

Financial Services

FNDF
20.2%
DFIV
34.3%

Industrials

FNDF
12.8%
DFIV
9.8%

Technology

FNDF
11.5%
DFIV
3.1%

Energy

FNDF
10.6%
DFIV
14.1%

Basic Materials

FNDF
10.0%
DFIV
10.5%

Consumer Cyclical

FNDF
8.2%
DFIV
9.7%

Consumer Defensive

FNDF
6.2%
DFIV
5.2%

Healthcare

FNDF
6.0%
DFIV
5.4%

Utilities

FNDF
4.3%
DFIV
2.3%

Communication Services

FNDF
3.4%
DFIV
4.0%

Real Estate

FNDF
0.9%
DFIV
1.7%

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

FNDF vs. DFIV — Risk / Return Rank

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

FNDF
FNDF Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
FNDF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9393
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FNDF Sortino Ratio Rank: 9191
Sortino Ratio Rank
FNDF Omega Ratio Rank: 9292
Omega Ratio Rank
FNDF Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
FNDF Martin Ratio Rank: 8888
Martin Ratio Rank

DFIV
DFIV Risk / Return Rank: 9393
Overall Rank
DFIV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9595
Sharpe Ratio Rank
DFIV Sortino Ratio Rank: 9494
Sortino Ratio Rank
DFIV Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
DFIV Calmar Ratio Rank: 9090
Calmar Ratio Rank
DFIV Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
Martin Ratio Rank
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.

FNDF vs. DFIV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) and Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV). 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.


FNDFDFIVDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.21

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.40

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.48

-0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.78

3.86

-0.08

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.23

14.96

-1.73

FNDF vs. DFIV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNDF Sharpe Ratio is 2.47, which is comparable to the DFIV Sharpe Ratio of 2.69. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNDF and DFIV, 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...

Drawdowns

FNDF vs. DFIV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNDF drawdown since its inception was -40.14%, which is greater than DFIV's maximum drawdown of -25.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNDF and DFIV.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FNDFDFIVDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.14%

-25.42%

-14.72%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.60%

-9.66%

-0.94%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.89%

-14.72%

+0.83%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.56%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-40.14%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.55%

-0.47%

-1.08%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.59%

-4.37%

-3.22%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.02%

2.49%

+0.53%

Volatility

FNDF vs. DFIV - Volatility Comparison

Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) has a higher volatility of 4.54% compared to Dimensional International Value ETF (DFIV) at 3.89%. This indicates that FNDF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than DFIV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FNDFDFIVDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.54%

3.89%

+0.65%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.24%

11.59%

+2.65%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.21%

13.91%

+2.30%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.34%

16.55%

-0.21%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.43%

16.55%

+0.88%

FNDF vs. DFIV - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNDF has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than DFIV's 0.27% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

FNDF vs. DFIV - Dividend Comparison

FNDF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.03%, more than DFIV's 2.58% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
DFIV
Dimensional International Value ETF
2.58%2.92%3.88%3.93%3.84%2.30%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
FNDF
Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF
3.03%3.44%4.01%3.41%3.10%3.54%2.17%3.20%3.47%2.32%2.42%2.08%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.92, FNDF and DFIV 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.

FNDF has higher volatility (4.54%) compared to DFIV (3.89%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNDF dropped -40.14% vs DFIV's -25.42%.

On 3-year performance, DFIV leads with 23.26% vs 21.76% for FNDF. On fees, FNDF is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, DFIV has been the lower-risk option at 3.89%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 3-year period, DFIV has performed better with a 23.26% return vs 21.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FNDF is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.27% for DFIV.

FNDF has the higher dividend yield at 3.03%, compared with 2.58% for DFIV.

They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and Dimensional. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for FNDF and 0.27% for DFIV.

DFIV currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.69 vs 2.47), 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 FNDF and DFIV

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