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

Performance

FNDF vs. VEA - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) and Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (VEA). 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 VEA's 13.84% return. Over the past 10 years, FNDF has outperformed VEA with an annualized return of 11.86%, while VEA has yielded a comparatively lower 10.05% annualized 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%

VEA

1D
-0.66%
1M
-0.27%
6M
7.42%
YTD
13.84%
1Y
29.71%
3Y*
18.08%
5Y*
9.76%
10Y*
10.05%
ALL TIME*
5.13%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$75.61M$73.89M$78.20M
$674.44M$796.70M$806.62M

FNDF vs. VEA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FNDF
Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF
20.14%40.99%2.29%20.22%-7.78%14.97%3.61%18.46%-14.21%23.98%
VEA
Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF
13.84%35.16%3.15%17.93%-15.34%11.66%9.71%22.62%-14.75%26.42%

Correlation

The correlation between FNDF and VEA is 0.96 - they have historically moved very closely together. At this level, their price movements offset little of one another.


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

0.96

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

0.97

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.97

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.97

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 15, 2013

0.97

The correlation between FNDF and VEA has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

FNDF vs. VEA - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
FNDF
VEA

Financial Services

20.2%
23.1%

Industrials

12.8%
17.9%

Technology

11.5%
18.4%

Energy

10.6%
4.5%

Basic Materials

10.0%
6.9%

Consumer Cyclical

8.2%
7.3%

Consumer Defensive

6.2%
5.3%

Healthcare

6.0%
7.9%

Utilities

4.3%
3.1%

Communication Services

3.4%
3.2%

Real Estate

0.9%
2.5%

Financial Services

FNDF
20.2%
VEA
23.1%

Industrials

FNDF
12.8%
VEA
17.9%

Technology

FNDF
11.5%
VEA
18.4%

Energy

FNDF
10.6%
VEA
4.5%

Basic Materials

FNDF
10.0%
VEA
6.9%

Consumer Cyclical

FNDF
8.2%
VEA
7.3%

Consumer Defensive

FNDF
6.2%
VEA
5.3%

Healthcare

FNDF
6.0%
VEA
7.9%

Utilities

FNDF
4.3%
VEA
3.1%

Communication Services

FNDF
3.4%
VEA
3.2%

Real Estate

FNDF
0.9%
VEA
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. VEA — 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

VEA
VEA Risk / Return Rank: 7575
Overall Rank
VEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7676
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
VEA Omega Ratio Rank: 7575
Omega Ratio Rank
VEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 7373
Calmar Ratio Rank
VEA Martin Ratio Rank: 7676
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. VEA - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) and Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (VEA). 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.


FNDFVEADifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.77

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.88

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.45

1.31

+0.14

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.78

2.53

+1.25

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

13.23

9.44

+3.79

FNDF vs. VEA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNDF Sharpe Ratio is 2.47, which is higher than the VEA Sharpe Ratio of 1.71. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of FNDF and VEA, 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. VEA - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum FNDF drawdown since its inception was -40.14%, smaller than the maximum VEA drawdown of -60.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNDF and VEA.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


FNDFVEADifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-40.14%

-60.68%

+20.54%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.60%

-11.63%

+1.03%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.89%

-13.45%

-0.44%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.56%

-29.71%

+4.15%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-40.14%

-35.73%

-4.41%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.55%

-2.45%

+0.90%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.59%

-13.20%

+5.61%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.02%

3.10%

-0.08%

Volatility

FNDF vs. VEA - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) is 4.54%, while Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (VEA) has a volatility of 5.40%. This indicates that FNDF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VEA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


FNDFVEADifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.54%

5.40%

-0.86%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

14.24%

15.40%

-1.16%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

16.21%

17.25%

-1.04%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.34%

16.84%

-0.50%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.43%

17.21%

+0.22%

FNDF vs. VEA - Expense Ratio Comparison

FNDF has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is higher than VEA's 0.03% 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. VEA - Dividend Comparison

FNDF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 3.03%, more than VEA's 2.57% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
VEA
Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF
2.57%3.22%3.35%3.15%2.91%3.16%2.04%3.04%3.35%2.77%3.05%2.92%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.96, FNDF and VEA 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.

VEA has higher volatility (5.40%) compared to FNDF (4.54%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNDF dropped -40.14% vs VEA's -60.68%.

On 10-year performance, FNDF leads with 11.86% vs 10.05% for VEA. On fees, VEA is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, FNDF has been the lower-risk option at 4.54%. 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 11.86% return vs 10.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VEA is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for FNDF.

FNDF has the higher dividend yield at 3.03%, compared with 2.57% for VEA.

FNDF tracks RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity Developed ex US Large Index (Net), while VEA tracks FTSE Developed All Cap ex US Index. They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for FNDF and 0.03% for VEA.

FNDF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.47 vs 1.71), 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 VEA

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