FNDF vs. EFAV

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

FNDF (Schwab Fundamental International Large Company Index ETF) and EFAV (iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF) are both Foreign Large Cap Equities funds - FNDF tracks the Russell Fundamental Developed ex-U.S. Large Company Index while EFAV tracks the MSCI EAFE Minimum Volatility Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FNDF returned 11.93%/yr vs 5.93%/yr for EFAV. Their correlation of 0.85 suggests significant overlap in exposure. FNDF charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.20%/yr for EFAV.

Performance

FNDF vs. EFAV - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab Fundamental International Large Company Index ETF (FNDF) and iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF (EFAV). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, FNDF achieves a 21.21% return, which is significantly higher than EFAV's 3.83% return. Over the past 10 years, FNDF has outperformed EFAV with an annualized return of 11.93%, while EFAV has yielded a comparatively lower 5.93% annualized return.

FNDF

• 1D: -0.67%
• 1M: 6.97%
• YTD: 21.21%
• 6M: 24.72%
• 1Y: 44.71%
• 3Y*: 24.10%
• 5Y*: 13.35%
• 10Y*: 11.93%

EFAV

• 1D: -0.68%
• 1M: -1.10%
• YTD: 3.83%
• 6M: 5.18%
• 1Y: 9.41%
• 3Y*: 12.87%
• 5Y*: 6.17%
• 10Y*: 5.93%

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

FNDF vs. EFAV - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
FNDF Schwab Fundamental International Large Company Index ETF	21.21%	40.99%	2.29%	20.22%	-7.78%	14.97%	3.61%	18.46%	-14.21%	23.98%
EFAV iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF	3.83%	26.00%	5.30%	12.52%	-15.11%	7.20%	-0.06%	16.67%	-5.74%	22.24%

Correlation

The correlation between FNDF and EFAV is 0.81, 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	0.81
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.84
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.84
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.84
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 16, 2013	0.85

The correlation between FNDF and EFAV has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.81 to 0.85 - a consistent structural relationship.

FNDF vs. EFAV - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	FNDF	EFAV
Financial Services	16.7%	19.9%
Industrials	15.9%	15.1%
Energy	12.3%	8.2%
Basic Materials	11.3%	1.6%
Technology	11.1%	4.5%
Consumer Cyclical	10.7%	5.2%
Consumer Defensive	6.9%	11.5%
Healthcare	5.5%	12.4%
Communication Services	4.9%	9.7%
Utilities	3.8%	9.1%
Real Estate	0.9%	2.9%

Return for Risk

FNDF vs. EFAV — Risk / Return Rank

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

FNDF

FNDF Risk / Return Rank: 84
FNDF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
FNDF Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
FNDF Omega Ratio Rank: 85
FNDF Calmar Ratio Rank: 80
FNDF Martin Ratio Rank: 80

EFAV

EFAV Risk / Return Rank: 26
EFAV Sharpe Ratio Rank: 25
EFAV Sortino Ratio Rank: 24
EFAV Omega Ratio Rank: 24
EFAV Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
EFAV Martin Ratio Rank: 28

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.

FNDF vs. EFAV - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab Fundamental International Large Company Index ETF (FNDF) and iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF (EFAV). 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.

	FNDF	EFAV	Difference
Sharpe ratio Return per unit of total volatility	2.99	0.92	+2.07
Sortino ratio Return per unit of downside risk	3.89	1.33	+2.55
Omega ratio Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.53	1.17	+0.36
Calmar ratio Return relative to maximum drawdown	4.24	1.46	+2.78
Martin ratio Return relative to average drawdown	16.19	4.10	+12.09
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

FNDF vs. EFAV - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNDF Sharpe Ratio is 2.99, which is higher than the EFAV Sharpe Ratio of 0.92. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNDF and EFAV, 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

	FNDF	EFAV	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.99	0.92	+2.07
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.83	0.53	+0.30
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.68	0.45	+0.23
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.54	0.53	0.00

Drawdowns

FNDF vs. EFAV - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNDF drawdown since its inception was -40.14%, which is greater than EFAV's maximum drawdown of -27.56%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNDF and EFAV.

Drawdown Indicators

	FNDF	EFAV	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-40.14%	-27.56%	-12.58%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-10.60%	-6.46%	-4.14%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-13.89%	-8.75%	-5.14%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-25.56%	-27.46%	+1.90%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-40.14%	-27.56%	-12.58%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.67%	-5.61%	+4.94%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.64%	-4.77%	-2.87%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.77%	2.30%	+0.47%

Volatility

FNDF vs. EFAV - Volatility Comparison

Schwab Fundamental International Large Company Index ETF (FNDF) has a higher volatility of 5.26% compared to iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF (EFAV) at 3.17%. This indicates that FNDF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than EFAV based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	FNDF	EFAV	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	5.26%	3.17%	+2.09%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.53%	8.17%	+4.36%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	15.06%	10.35%	+4.71%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	16.18%	11.79%	+4.39%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.67%	13.21%	+4.46%

FNDF vs. EFAV - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNDF has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than EFAV's 0.20% 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

FNDF vs. EFAV - Dividend Comparison

FNDF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.84%, less than EFAV's 3.08% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
EFAV iShares Edge MSCI Min Vol EAFE ETF	3.08%	3.20%	3.24%	3.08%	2.53%	2.47%	1.33%	4.19%	3.34%	2.45%	3.94%	2.49%
FNDF Schwab Fundamental International Large Company Index ETF	2.84%	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

Can I hold both FNDF and EFAV in my portfolio?

FNDF and EFAV have a correlation of 0.81, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, FNDF or EFAV?

FNDF has higher volatility (5.26%) compared to EFAV (3.17%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNDF dropped -40.14% vs EFAV's -27.56%.

Which ETF is better, FNDF or EFAV?

On 10-year performance, FNDF leads with 11.93% vs 5.93% for EFAV. On fees, EFAV is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, EFAV has been the lower-risk option at 3.17%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, FNDF or EFAV?

Over the 10-year period, FNDF has performed better with a 11.93% return vs 5.93%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, FNDF or EFAV?

EFAV is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for FNDF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, FNDF or EFAV?

EFAV has the higher dividend yield at 3.08%, compared with 2.84% for FNDF.

What is the main difference between FNDF and EFAV?

FNDF tracks Russell Fundamental Developed ex-U.S. Large Company Index, while EFAV tracks MSCI EAFE Minimum Volatility Index. They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and iShares. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for FNDF and 0.20% for EFAV.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FNDF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.99 vs 0.92), 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.