GPIQ vs. FNDF

Last updated Jun 14, 2026

GPIQ (Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF) and FNDF (Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - GPIQ is a Nasdaq-100 fund actively managed by Goldman Sachs, while FNDF is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity Developed ex US Large Index (Net). GPIQ is actively managed, while FNDF is passively managed. Over the past year, GPIQ returned 34.42% vs 41.60% for FNDF. A 0.57 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. GPIQ charges 0.29%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for FNDF.

Performance

GPIQ vs. FNDF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF (GPIQ) and Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, GPIQ achieves a 15.73% return, which is significantly lower than FNDF's 19.66% return.

GPIQ

• 1D: 0.71%
• 1M: 0.64%
• YTD: 15.73%
• 6M: 16.33%
• 1Y: 34.42%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

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%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

GPIQ vs. FNDF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
GPIQ Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF	15.73%	19.77%	23.22%	15.17%
FNDF Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF	19.66%	40.99%	2.29%	13.20%

Correlation

The correlation between GPIQ and FNDF is 0.65, 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	0.65
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Oct 26, 2023	0.57

The correlation between GPIQ and FNDF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.57 to 0.65 - a consistent structural relationship.

GPIQ vs. FNDF - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	GPIQ	FNDF
Technology	58.7%	14.4%
Communication Services	14.1%	4.9%
Consumer Cyclical	11.6%	10.8%
Consumer Defensive	6.4%	6.5%
Healthcare	3.6%	5.2%
Industrials	2.6%	15.5%
Utilities	1.3%	3.5%
Basic Materials	1.0%	11.3%
Energy	0.5%	10.9%
Financial Services	0.2%	16.2%
Real Estate	0.1%	0.8%

Return for Risk

GPIQ vs. FNDF — Risk / Return Rank

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

GPIQ

GPIQ Risk / Return Rank: 81
GPIQ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 83
GPIQ Sortino Ratio Rank: 78
GPIQ Omega Ratio Rank: 81
GPIQ Calmar Ratio Rank: 78
GPIQ Martin Ratio Rank: 84

FNDF

FNDF Risk / Return Rank: 85
FNDF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 88
FNDF Sortino Ratio Rank: 85
FNDF Omega Ratio Rank: 86
FNDF Calmar Ratio Rank: 82
FNDF Martin Ratio Rank: 82

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.

GPIQ vs. FNDF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF (GPIQ) and Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF). 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.

	GPIQ	FNDF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.29	2.53	-0.24
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.00	3.30	-0.30
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.42	1.45	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.50	3.82	-0.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	14.86	14.27	+0.59

GPIQ vs. FNDF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current GPIQ Sharpe Ratio is 2.29, which is comparable to the FNDF Sharpe Ratio of 2.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of GPIQ and FNDF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

GPIQ vs. FNDF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum GPIQ drawdown since its inception was -21.06%, smaller than the maximum FNDF drawdown of -40.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for GPIQ and FNDF.

Drawdown Indicators

	GPIQ	FNDF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-21.06%	-40.14%	+19.08%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-9.51%	-10.60%	+1.09%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-13.89%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-25.56%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-40.14%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-2.35%	-1.94%	-0.41%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-2.28%	-7.63%	+5.35%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	2.24%	2.84%	-0.60%

Volatility

GPIQ vs. FNDF - Volatility Comparison

Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF (GPIQ) and Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) have volatilities of 6.42% and 6.65%, 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.

Volatility by Period

	GPIQ	FNDF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.42%	6.65%	-0.23%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	11.92%	13.64%	-1.72%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	14.53%	16.00%	-1.47%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	17.72%	16.35%	+1.37%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.72%	17.71%	+0.01%

GPIQ vs. FNDF - Expense Ratio Comparison

GPIQ has a 0.29% expense ratio, which is higher than FNDF's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

GPIQ vs. FNDF - Dividend Comparison

GPIQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 9.53%, more than FNDF's 2.87% 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%
GPIQ Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF	9.53%	9.81%	9.18%	1.74%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both GPIQ and FNDF in my portfolio?

GPIQ and FNDF have a correlation of 0.65, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, GPIQ or FNDF?

FNDF has higher volatility (6.65%) compared to GPIQ (6.42%). In terms of maximum drawdown, GPIQ dropped -21.06% vs FNDF's -40.14%.

Which ETF is better, GPIQ or FNDF?

On 1-year performance, FNDF leads with 41.60% vs 34.42% for GPIQ. On fees, FNDF is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, GPIQ has been the lower-risk option at 6.42%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, GPIQ or FNDF?

Over the 1-year period, FNDF has performed better with a 41.60% return vs 34.42%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, GPIQ or FNDF?

FNDF is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for GPIQ.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, GPIQ or FNDF?

GPIQ has the higher dividend yield at 9.53%, compared with 2.87% for FNDF.

What is the main difference between GPIQ and FNDF?

GPIQ is categorized as Nasdaq-100, while FNDF is Foreign Large Cap Equities. They also come from different issuers: Goldman Sachs and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.29% for GPIQ and 0.25% for FNDF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FNDF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 2.29), 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.