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

Performance

FNDF vs. FNDA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) and Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF (FNDA). 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 17.34% return, which is significantly higher than FNDA's 14.40% return. Over the past 10 years, FNDF has outperformed FNDA with an annualized return of 11.78%, while FNDA has yielded a comparatively lower 10.81% annualized return.


FNDF

1D
0.86%
1M
-0.45%
YTD
17.34%
6M
20.48%
1Y
39.17%
3Y*
22.42%
5Y*
12.75%
10Y*
11.78%

FNDA

1D
0.64%
1M
-0.11%
YTD
14.40%
6M
14.29%
1Y
29.17%
3Y*
14.87%
5Y*
6.73%
10Y*
10.81%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FNDF vs. FNDA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FNDF
Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF
17.34%40.99%2.29%20.22%-7.78%14.97%3.61%18.46%-14.21%23.98%
FNDA
Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF
14.40%7.44%9.00%20.29%-14.83%31.12%8.44%24.34%-12.12%12.68%

Correlation

The correlation between FNDF and FNDA is 0.69, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.69

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

0.70

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

0.75

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

0.74

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

0.74

The correlation between FNDF and FNDA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.75 - a consistent structural relationship.

FNDF vs. FNDA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FNDF
FNDA

Financial Services

16.7%
14.6%

Industrials

15.9%
18.9%

Energy

12.3%
6.2%

Basic Materials

11.3%
5.2%

Technology

11.1%
14.9%

Consumer Cyclical

10.7%
12.2%

Consumer Defensive

6.9%
4.2%

Healthcare

5.5%
6.8%

Communication Services

4.9%
4.1%

Utilities

3.8%
2.8%

Real Estate

0.9%
9.9%

Financial Services

FNDF
16.7%
FNDA
14.6%

Industrials

FNDF
15.9%
FNDA
18.9%

Energy

FNDF
12.3%
FNDA
6.2%

Basic Materials

FNDF
11.3%
FNDA
5.2%

Technology

FNDF
11.1%
FNDA
14.9%

Consumer Cyclical

FNDF
10.7%
FNDA
12.2%

Consumer Defensive

FNDF
6.9%
FNDA
4.2%

Healthcare

FNDF
5.5%
FNDA
6.8%

Communication Services

FNDF
4.9%
FNDA
4.1%

Utilities

FNDF
3.8%
FNDA
2.8%

Real Estate

FNDF
0.9%
FNDA
9.9%

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

FNDF vs. FNDA — Risk / Return Rank

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

FNDF
FNDF Risk / Return Rank: 8282
Overall Rank
FNDF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8686
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FNDF Sortino Ratio Rank: 8181
Sortino Ratio Rank
FNDF Omega Ratio Rank: 8383
Omega Ratio Rank
FNDF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7979
Calmar Ratio Rank
FNDF Martin Ratio Rank: 8080
Martin Ratio Rank

FNDA
FNDA Risk / Return Rank: 5959
Overall Rank
FNDA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5555
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FNDA Sortino Ratio Rank: 5858
Sortino Ratio Rank
FNDA Omega Ratio Rank: 5252
Omega Ratio Rank
FNDA Calmar Ratio Rank: 6969
Calmar Ratio Rank
FNDA Martin Ratio Rank: 6262
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.

FNDF vs. FNDA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) and Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF (FNDA). 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.


FNDFFNDADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.82

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.79

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.29

+0.16

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.71

3.13

+0.59

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.05

10.09

+3.95

FNDF vs. FNDA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNDF Sharpe Ratio is 2.53, which is higher than the FNDA Sharpe Ratio of 1.70. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNDF and FNDA, 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


FNDFFNDADifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.53

1.70

+0.82

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.79

0.32

+0.46

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.67

0.48

+0.18

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.52

0.49

+0.03

Drawdowns

FNDF vs. FNDA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNDF drawdown since its inception was -40.14%, smaller than the maximum FNDA drawdown of -44.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNDF and FNDA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FNDFFNDADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.14%

-44.64%

+4.50%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.60%

-9.36%

-1.24%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.89%

-25.92%

+12.03%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.56%

-25.92%

+0.36%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-40.14%

-44.64%

+4.50%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.84%

-1.42%

-2.42%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.64%

-6.69%

-0.95%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.80%

2.90%

-0.10%

Volatility

FNDF vs. FNDA - Volatility Comparison

Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) has a higher volatility of 5.97% compared to Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF (FNDA) at 4.61%. This indicates that FNDF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FNDA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FNDFFNDADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.97%

4.61%

+1.36%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.19%

11.98%

+1.21%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.60%

17.24%

-1.64%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.28%

20.91%

-4.63%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.71%

22.39%

-4.68%

FNDF vs. FNDA - Expense Ratio Comparison

Both FNDF and FNDA have an expense ratio of 0.25%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

FNDF vs. FNDA - Dividend Comparison

FNDF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.93%, more than FNDA's 1.09% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FNDA
Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF
1.09%1.22%1.53%1.37%1.38%1.15%1.31%1.38%1.64%1.30%1.18%1.33%
FNDF
Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF
2.93%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


FNDF and FNDA have a correlation of 0.69, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FNDF has higher volatility (5.97%) compared to FNDA (4.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNDF dropped -40.14% vs FNDA's -44.64%.

On 10-year performance, FNDF leads with 11.78% vs 10.81% for FNDA. Both ETFs have the same 0.25% expense ratio. On volatility, FNDA has been the lower-risk option at 4.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FNDF has performed better with a 11.78% return vs 10.81%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FNDF and FNDA have the same expense ratio: 0.25% per year.

FNDF has the higher dividend yield at 2.93%, compared with 1.09% for FNDA.

FNDF is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while FNDA is Small Cap Blend Equities. FNDF tracks RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity Developed ex US Large Index (Net), while FNDA tracks Russell RAFI Small Company US.

FNDF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 1.70), 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 FNDA

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