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 19.55% return, which is significantly higher than VEA's 16.69% return. Over the past 10 years, FNDF has outperformed VEA with an annualized return of 12.46%, while VEA has yielded a comparatively lower 11.06% annualized return.


FNDF

1D
-0.13%
1M
1.27%
YTD
19.55%
6M
20.57%
1Y
43.50%
3Y*
23.53%
5Y*
13.79%
10Y*
12.46%

VEA

1D
0.11%
1M
3.28%
YTD
16.69%
6M
17.33%
1Y
35.42%
3Y*
20.72%
5Y*
10.37%
10Y*
11.06%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

FNDF vs. VEA - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
FNDF
Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF
19.55%40.99%2.29%20.22%-7.78%14.97%3.61%18.46%-14.21%23.98%
VEA
Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF
16.69%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 - these two move nearly in lockstep. At this level, holding both provides almost no diversification benefit. If you already own one, adding the other does little to reduce portfolio risk.


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

0.96

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

0.97

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

0.97

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

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

16.2%
22.3%

Industrials

15.5%
17.5%

Technology

14.4%
16.6%

Basic Materials

11.3%
7.5%

Energy

10.9%
4.7%

Consumer Cyclical

10.8%
7.4%

Consumer Defensive

6.5%
5.5%

Healthcare

5.2%
7.6%

Communication Services

4.9%
3.2%

Utilities

3.5%
3.0%

Real Estate

0.8%
2.5%

Financial Services

FNDF
16.2%
VEA
22.3%

Industrials

FNDF
15.5%
VEA
17.5%

Technology

FNDF
14.4%
VEA
16.6%

Basic Materials

FNDF
11.3%
VEA
7.5%

Energy

FNDF
10.9%
VEA
4.7%

Consumer Cyclical

FNDF
10.8%
VEA
7.4%

Consumer Defensive

FNDF
6.5%
VEA
5.5%

Healthcare

FNDF
5.2%
VEA
7.6%

Communication Services

FNDF
4.9%
VEA
3.2%

Utilities

FNDF
3.5%
VEA
3.0%

Real Estate

FNDF
0.8%
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 risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

FNDF
FNDF Risk / Return Rank: 8484
Overall Rank
FNDF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8787
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FNDF Sortino Ratio Rank: 8383
Sortino Ratio Rank
FNDF Omega Ratio Rank: 8585
Omega Ratio Rank
FNDF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
FNDF Martin Ratio Rank: 8181
Martin Ratio Rank

VEA
VEA Risk / Return Rank: 6767
Overall Rank
VEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6969
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
VEA Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
VEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 6464
Calmar Ratio Rank
VEA Martin Ratio Rank: 6666
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. 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

+0.59

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.62

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.49

1.39

+0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

4.13

3.06

+1.06

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

15.38

11.80

+3.58

FNDF vs. VEA - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current FNDF Sharpe Ratio is 2.75, which is comparable to the VEA Sharpe Ratio of 2.16. 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

-2.03%

0.00%

-2.03%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.62%

-13.26%

+5.64%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.84%

3.01%

-0.17%

Volatility

FNDF vs. VEA - Volatility Comparison

Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) and Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (VEA) have volatilities of 6.27% and 6.32%, respectively, indicating that both stocks experience similar levels of price fluctuations. This suggests that the risk associated with both stocks, as measured by volatility, is nearly the same. 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

6.27%

6.32%

-0.05%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.65%

14.39%

-0.74%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

15.95%

16.52%

-0.57%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.32%

16.71%

-0.39%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.67%

17.38%

+0.29%

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 2.88%, more than VEA's 2.50% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FNDF
Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF
2.88%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
2.50%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 (6.32%) compared to FNDF (6.27%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNDF dropped -40.14% vs VEA's -60.68%.

On 10-year performance, FNDF leads with 12.46% vs 11.06% for VEA. On fees, VEA is cheaper at 0.03% per year. Their volatility is very similar. 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 12.46% return vs 11.06%. 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 2.88%, compared with 2.50% 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 (2.75 vs 2.16), 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