FNDX vs. GLTR
FNDX (Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF) and GLTR (abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - FNDX is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity US Large Index, while GLTR is a Precious Metals fund tracking the ETFS Physical Precious Metals Basket Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, FNDX returned 14.45%/yr vs 12.08%/yr for GLTR. At a 0.13 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. FNDX charges 0.25%/yr vs 0.60%/yr for GLTR.
Performance
FNDX vs. GLTR - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, FNDX achieves a 15.49% return, which is significantly higher than GLTR's -4.66% return. Over the past 10 years, FNDX has outperformed GLTR with an annualized return of 14.45%, while GLTR has yielded a comparatively lower 12.08% annualized return.
FNDX
- 1D
- 0.90%
- 1M
- 3.30%
- YTD
- 15.49%
- 6M
- 14.86%
- 1Y
- 32.83%
- 3Y*
- 20.28%
- 5Y*
- 13.11%
- 10Y*
- 14.45%
GLTR
- 1D
- 0.30%
- 1M
- -9.08%
- YTD
- -4.66%
- 6M
- 0.76%
- 1Y
- 38.86%
- 3Y*
- 29.97%
- 5Y*
- 14.04%
- 10Y*
- 12.08%
FNDX vs. GLTR - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FNDX Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF | 15.49% | 16.94% | 16.77% | 18.23% | -6.92% | 31.73% | 9.12% | 28.65% | -7.30% | 17.12% |
GLTR abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF | -4.66% | 87.25% | 20.63% | 2.01% | -0.25% | -9.60% | 29.52% | 20.96% | -2.85% | 12.94% |
Correlation
The correlation between FNDX and GLTR is 0.27, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 0.27 |
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period | 0.22 |
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.23 |
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period | 0.16 |
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 15, 2013 | 0.13 |
The correlation between FNDX and GLTR shifts across timeframes, from 0.13 (all time) to 0.27 (1 year), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.
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
FNDX vs. GLTR — Risk / Return Rank
FNDX
GLTR
FNDX vs. GLTR - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF (FNDX) and abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR). 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.
| FNDX | GLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | +1.99 | ||
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | +2.83 | ||
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.56 | 1.22 | +0.33 |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 5.23 | 1.17 | +4.06 |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 20.31 | 2.88 | +17.43 |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
FNDX vs. GLTR - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum FNDX drawdown since its inception was -37.72%, smaller than the maximum GLTR drawdown of -55.70%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for FNDX and GLTR.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| FNDX | GLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -37.72% | -55.70% | +17.98% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -6.06% | -34.09% | +28.03% |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -16.30% | -34.09% | +17.79% |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -19.06% | -34.09% | +15.03% |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | -37.72% | -34.09% | -3.63% |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -31.27% | +31.27% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.55% | -28.82% | +25.27% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 1.56% | 13.86% | -12.30% |
Volatility
FNDX vs. GLTR - Volatility Comparison
The current volatility for Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF (FNDX) is 3.18%, while abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF (GLTR) has a volatility of 10.43%. This indicates that FNDX experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than GLTR based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| FNDX | GLTR | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 3.18% | 10.43% | -7.25% |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 7.58% | 36.24% | -28.66% |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 10.45% | 38.40% | -27.95% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.21% | 23.87% | -8.66% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 17.51% | 20.64% | -3.13% |
FNDX vs. GLTR - Expense Ratio Comparison
FNDX has a 0.25% expense ratio, which is lower than GLTR's 0.60% expense ratio.
Dividends
FNDX vs. GLTR - Dividend Comparison
FNDX's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.44%, while GLTR has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FNDX Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF | 1.44% | 1.63% | 1.76% | 1.82% | 2.07% | 1.64% | 2.29% | 2.23% | 2.40% | 1.86% | 2.01% | 2.01% |
GLTR abrdn Physical Precious Metals Basket Shares ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
FNDX and GLTR have a correlation of 0.27, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
GLTR has higher volatility (10.43%) compared to FNDX (3.18%). In terms of maximum drawdown, FNDX dropped -37.72% vs GLTR's -55.70%.
On 10-year performance, FNDX leads with 14.45% vs 12.08% for GLTR. On fees, FNDX is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, FNDX has been the lower-risk option at 3.18%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
Over the 10-year period, FNDX has performed better with a 14.45% return vs 12.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.
FNDX is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.60% for GLTR.
FNDX has the higher dividend yield at 1.44%, compared with 0.00% for GLTR.
FNDX is categorized as Large Cap Value Equities, while GLTR is Precious Metals. FNDX tracks RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity US Large Index, while GLTR tracks ETFS Physical Precious Metals Basket Index. They also come from different issuers: Charles Schwab and abrdn. Their fees differ too: 0.25% for FNDX and 0.60% for GLTR.
FNDX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.03 vs 1.04), 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 FNDX and GLTR
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