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

Performance

FNDF vs. PRF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) and Invesco RAFI US 1000 ETF (PRF). 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 PRF's 13.92% return. Over the past 10 years, FNDF has underperformed PRF with an annualized return of 11.78%, while PRF has yielded a comparatively higher 13.59% 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%

PRF

1D
0.40%
1M
1.27%
YTD
13.92%
6M
14.77%
1Y
31.21%
3Y*
20.66%
5Y*
12.37%
10Y*
13.59%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FNDF vs. PRF - 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%
PRF
Invesco RAFI US 1000 ETF
13.92%18.33%16.73%15.72%-7.79%31.12%7.78%27.42%-8.71%16.01%

Correlation

The correlation between FNDF and PRF is 0.74, 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

0.74

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

0.72

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

0.78

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

0.79

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

0.80

The correlation between FNDF and PRF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.72 to 0.80 - a consistent structural relationship.

FNDF vs. PRF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FNDF
PRF

Financial Services

16.7%
15.4%

Industrials

15.9%
9.2%

Energy

12.3%
8.2%

Basic Materials

11.3%
3.4%

Technology

11.1%
20.9%

Consumer Cyclical

10.7%
9.1%

Consumer Defensive

6.9%
6.3%

Healthcare

5.5%
11.7%

Communication Services

4.9%
10.2%

Utilities

3.8%
3.1%

Real Estate

0.9%
2.5%

Financial Services

FNDF
16.7%
PRF
15.4%

Industrials

FNDF
15.9%
PRF
9.2%

Energy

FNDF
12.3%
PRF
8.2%

Basic Materials

FNDF
11.3%
PRF
3.4%

Technology

FNDF
11.1%
PRF
20.9%

Consumer Cyclical

FNDF
10.7%
PRF
9.1%

Consumer Defensive

FNDF
6.9%
PRF
6.3%

Healthcare

FNDF
5.5%
PRF
11.7%

Communication Services

FNDF
4.9%
PRF
10.2%

Utilities

FNDF
3.8%
PRF
3.1%

Real Estate

FNDF
0.9%
PRF
2.5%

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. PRF — 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

PRF
PRF Risk / Return Rank: 9191
Overall Rank
PRF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9292
Sharpe Ratio Rank
PRF Sortino Ratio Rank: 9292
Sortino Ratio Rank
PRF Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
PRF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
PRF Martin Ratio Rank: 9191
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. PRF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) and Invesco RAFI US 1000 ETF (PRF). 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.


FNDFPRFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.39

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.75

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.53

-0.08

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.71

4.76

-1.04

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

14.05

19.58

-5.53

FNDF vs. PRF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNDF Sharpe Ratio is 2.53, which is comparable to the PRF Sharpe Ratio of 2.91. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNDF and PRF, 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


FNDFPRFDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.53

2.91

-0.39

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.79

0.82

-0.03

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.67

0.77

-0.10

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.52

0.48

+0.04

Drawdowns

FNDF vs. PRF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNDF drawdown since its inception was -40.14%, smaller than the maximum PRF drawdown of -60.35%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNDF and PRF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FNDFPRFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.14%

-60.35%

+20.21%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.60%

-6.59%

-4.01%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.89%

-15.82%

+1.93%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.56%

-19.72%

-5.84%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-40.14%

-38.16%

-1.98%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.84%

-1.50%

-2.34%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.64%

-6.93%

-0.71%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.80%

1.60%

+1.20%

Volatility

FNDF vs. PRF - Volatility Comparison

Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) has a higher volatility of 5.97% compared to Invesco RAFI US 1000 ETF (PRF) at 3.02%. This indicates that FNDF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than PRF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FNDFPRFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.97%

3.02%

+2.95%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.19%

8.00%

+5.19%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.60%

10.78%

+4.82%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.28%

15.21%

+1.07%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.71%

17.68%

+0.03%

FNDF vs. PRF - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNDF has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than PRF's 0.34% expense ratio.


Dividends

FNDF vs. PRF - Dividend Comparison

FNDF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.93%, more than PRF's 1.39% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
PRF
Invesco RAFI US 1000 ETF
1.39%1.59%1.78%1.84%2.01%1.58%1.97%1.99%2.25%1.58%2.17%2.25%

Frequently Asked Questions


FNDF and PRF have a correlation of 0.74, 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 PRF (3.02%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNDF dropped -40.14% vs PRF's -60.35%.

On 10-year performance, PRF leads with 13.59% vs 11.78% for FNDF. On fees, FNDF is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, PRF has been the lower-risk option at 3.02%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, PRF has performed better with a 13.59% return vs 11.78%. 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 0.34% for PRF.

FNDF has the higher dividend yield at 2.93%, compared with 1.39% for PRF.

FNDF is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while PRF is Large Cap Value Equities. FNDF tracks RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity Developed ex US Large Index (Net), while PRF tracks RAFI Fundamental Select US 1000 Index. They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and Invesco. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for FNDF and 0.34% for PRF.

PRF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.91 vs 2.53), 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 PRF

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