FNDF vs. RTH
FNDF (Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF) and RTH (VanEck Vectors Retail ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FNDF is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity Developed ex US Large Index (Net), while RTH is a Consumer Discretionary Equities fund tracking the MVIS US Listed Retail 25 Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FNDF returned 12.34%/yr vs 14.35%/yr for RTH. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. FNDF charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.35%/yr for RTH.
Performance
FNDF vs. RTH - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FNDF achieves a 19.66% return, which is significantly higher than RTH's 4.33% return. Over the past 10 years, FNDF has underperformed RTH with an annualized return of 12.34%, while RTH has yielded a comparatively higher 14.35% annualized return.
FNDF
- 1D
- 0.39%
- 1M
- 0.88%
- YTD
- 19.66%
- 6M
- 21.60%
- 1Y
- 41.60%
- 3Y*
- 22.69%
- 5Y*
- 13.11%
- 10Y*
- 12.34%
RTH
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- -1.59%
- YTD
- 4.33%
- 6M
- 2.84%
- 1Y
- 12.87%
- 3Y*
- 16.16%
- 5Y*
- 9.69%
- 10Y*
- 14.35%
FNDF vs. RTH - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FNDF Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF | 19.66% | 40.99% | 2.29% | 20.22% | -7.78% | 14.97% | 3.61% | 18.46% | -14.21% | 23.98% |
RTH VanEck Vectors Retail ETF | 4.33% | 12.36% | 20.02% | 20.07% | -17.67% | 24.94% | 31.62% | 29.06% | 3.87% | 22.45% |
Correlation
The correlation between FNDF and RTH is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.42 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.51 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.57 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.58 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 15, 2013 | 0.59 |
The correlation between FNDF and RTH shifts across timeframes, from 0.42 (1 year) to 0.59 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
FNDF vs. RTH - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
FNDF
RTH
Financial Services
-
Industrials
Technology
-
Basic Materials
-
Energy
-
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Healthcare
Communication Services
-
Utilities
-
Real Estate
-
Financial Services
FNDF
RTH
-
Industrials
FNDF
RTH
Technology
FNDF
RTH
-
Basic Materials
FNDF
RTH
-
Energy
FNDF
RTH
-
Consumer Cyclical
FNDF
RTH
Consumer Defensive
FNDF
RTH
Healthcare
FNDF
RTH
Communication Services
FNDF
RTH
-
Utilities
FNDF
RTH
-
Real Estate
FNDF
RTH
-
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. RTH — Risk / Return Rank
FNDF
RTH
FNDF vs. RTH - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) and VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH). 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.
| FNDF | RTH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.56 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +1.79 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.45 | 1.18 | +0.28 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 3.82 | 1.50 | +2.32 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 14.27 | 4.99 | +9.28 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FNDF vs. RTH - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FNDF drawdown since its inception was -40.14%, smaller than the maximum RTH drawdown of -42.32%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNDF and RTH.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FNDF | RTH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -40.14% | -42.32% | +2.18% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -10.60% | -7.83% | -2.77% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -13.89% | -13.80% | -0.09% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -25.56% | -25.00% | -0.56% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -40.14% | -25.00% | -15.14% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -1.94% | -3.58% | +1.64% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.63% | -7.34% | -0.29% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 2.84% | 2.35% | +0.49% |
Volatility
FNDF vs. RTH - Volatility Comparison
Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) has a higher volatility of 6.65% compared to VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) at 3.85%. This indicates that FNDF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than RTH based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FNDF | RTH | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 6.65% | 3.85% | +2.80% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 13.64% | 9.28% | +4.36% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 16.00% | 12.09% | +3.91% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 16.35% | 16.81% | -0.46% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.71% | 17.54% | +0.17% |
FNDF vs. RTH - Expense Ratio Comparison
FNDF has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than RTH's 0.35% expense ratio.
Dividends
FNDF vs. RTH - Dividend Comparison
FNDF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.87%, more than RTH's 0.93% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FNDF Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF | 2.87% | 3.44% | 4.01% | 3.41% | 3.10% | 3.54% | 2.17% | 3.20% | 3.47% | 2.32% | 2.42% | 2.08% |
RTH VanEck Vectors Retail ETF | 0.93% | 0.97% | 0.77% | 1.07% | 1.16% | 0.78% | 0.64% | 0.91% | 1.05% | 1.56% | 1.84% | 2.25% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FNDF and RTH have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
FNDF has higher volatility (6.65%) compared to RTH (3.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNDF dropped -40.14% vs RTH's -42.32%.
On 10-year performance, RTH leads with 14.35% vs 12.34% for FNDF. On fees, FNDF is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, RTH has been the lower-risk option at 3.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, RTH has performed better with a 14.35% return vs 12.34%. 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 0.35% for RTH.
FNDF has the higher dividend yield at 2.87%, compared with 0.93% for RTH.
FNDF is categorized as Foreign Large Cap Equities, while RTH is Consumer Discretionary Equities. FNDF tracks RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity Developed ex US Large Index (Net), while RTH tracks MVIS US Listed Retail 25 Index. They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and VanEck. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for FNDF and 0.35% for RTH.
FNDF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 0.97), 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.
Find the right allocation for FNDF and RTH
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