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

Performance

IMTM vs. FNDF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares MSCI Intl Momentum Factor ETF (IMTM) and Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, IMTM achieves a 11.09% return, which is significantly lower than FNDF's 16.43% return. Over the past 10 years, IMTM has underperformed FNDF with an annualized return of 10.18%, while FNDF has yielded a comparatively higher 12.17% annualized return.


IMTM

1D
-3.05%
1M
0.97%
YTD
11.09%
6M
10.38%
1Y
24.50%
3Y*
21.49%
5Y*
9.41%
10Y*
10.18%

FNDF

1D
-2.61%
1M
-1.37%
YTD
16.43%
6M
16.74%
1Y
39.04%
3Y*
22.45%
5Y*
12.99%
10Y*
12.17%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

IMTM vs. FNDF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
IMTM
iShares MSCI Intl Momentum Factor ETF
11.09%34.50%12.17%13.89%-16.81%3.50%22.17%24.52%-14.31%25.46%
FNDF
Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF
16.43%40.99%2.29%20.22%-7.78%14.97%3.61%18.46%-14.21%23.98%

Correlation

The correlation between IMTM and FNDF is 0.85, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


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

0.85

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

0.89

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

0.91

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

0.85

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 26, 2015

0.80

The correlation between IMTM and FNDF shifts across timeframes, from 0.80 (all time) to 0.91 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

IMTM vs. FNDF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
IMTM
FNDF

Financial Services

28.6%
16.2%

Technology

15.6%
14.4%

Industrials

15.5%
15.5%

Energy

10.0%
10.9%

Basic Materials

9.7%
11.3%

Healthcare

8.9%
5.2%

Utilities

5.3%
3.5%

Consumer Defensive

2.1%
6.5%

Consumer Cyclical

1.8%
10.8%

Communication Services

1.5%
4.9%

Real Estate

1.1%
0.8%

Financial Services

IMTM
28.6%
FNDF
16.2%

Technology

IMTM
15.6%
FNDF
14.4%

Industrials

IMTM
15.5%
FNDF
15.5%

Energy

IMTM
10.0%
FNDF
10.9%

Basic Materials

IMTM
9.7%
FNDF
11.3%

Healthcare

IMTM
8.9%
FNDF
5.2%

Utilities

IMTM
5.3%
FNDF
3.5%

Consumer Defensive

IMTM
2.1%
FNDF
6.5%

Consumer Cyclical

IMTM
1.8%
FNDF
10.8%

Communication Services

IMTM
1.5%
FNDF
4.9%

Real Estate

IMTM
1.1%
FNDF
0.8%

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

IMTM vs. FNDF — Risk / Return Rank

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

IMTM
IMTM Risk / Return Rank: 4141
Overall Rank
IMTM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4040
Sharpe Ratio Rank
IMTM Sortino Ratio Rank: 4040
Sortino Ratio Rank
IMTM Omega Ratio Rank: 4040
Omega Ratio Rank
IMTM Calmar Ratio Rank: 4040
Calmar Ratio Rank
IMTM Martin Ratio Rank: 4747
Martin Ratio Rank

FNDF
FNDF Risk / Return Rank: 7676
Overall Rank
FNDF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8080
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FNDF Sortino Ratio Rank: 7474
Sortino Ratio Rank
FNDF Omega Ratio Rank: 7878
Omega Ratio Rank
FNDF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7575
Calmar Ratio Rank
FNDF Martin Ratio Rank: 7575
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.

IMTM vs. FNDF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares MSCI Intl Momentum Factor ETF (IMTM) 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.


IMTMFNDFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.07

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.20

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.25

1.44

-0.19

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.92

3.70

-1.79

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

7.58

13.74

-6.16

IMTM vs. FNDF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current IMTM Sharpe Ratio is 1.35, which is lower than the FNDF Sharpe Ratio of 2.43. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of IMTM 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.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

IMTM vs. FNDF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum IMTM drawdown since its inception was -32.66%, smaller than the maximum FNDF drawdown of -40.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for IMTM and FNDF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


IMTMFNDFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-32.66%

-40.14%

+7.48%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.85%

-10.60%

-2.25%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-12.85%

-13.89%

+1.04%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-32.66%

-25.56%

-7.10%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-32.66%

-40.14%

+7.48%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.05%

-4.59%

+1.54%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.42%

-7.62%

+0.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.24%

2.85%

+0.39%

Volatility

IMTM vs. FNDF - Volatility Comparison

iShares MSCI Intl Momentum Factor ETF (IMTM) has a higher volatility of 7.39% compared to Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) at 6.77%. This indicates that IMTM's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FNDF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


IMTMFNDFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

7.39%

6.77%

+0.62%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

16.35%

13.93%

+2.42%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.19%

16.16%

+2.03%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

17.85%

16.36%

+1.49%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.62%

17.47%

+0.15%

IMTM vs. FNDF - Expense Ratio Comparison

IMTM has a 0.30% expense ratio, which is higher than FNDF's 0.25% expense ratio.


Dividends

IMTM vs. FNDF - Dividend Comparison

IMTM's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 4.41%, more than FNDF's 2.95% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FNDF
Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF
2.95%3.44%4.01%3.41%3.10%3.54%2.17%3.20%3.47%2.32%2.42%2.08%
IMTM
iShares MSCI Intl Momentum Factor ETF
4.41%4.70%2.93%2.29%2.68%2.51%0.97%2.13%2.36%1.92%2.75%1.56%

Frequently Asked Questions


IMTM and FNDF have a correlation of 0.85, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

IMTM has higher volatility (7.39%) compared to FNDF (6.77%). In terms of maximum drawdown, IMTM dropped -32.66% vs FNDF's -40.14%.

On 10-year performance, FNDF leads with 12.17% vs 10.18% for IMTM. On fees, FNDF is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, FNDF has been the lower-risk option at 6.77%. 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 12.17% return vs 10.18%. 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 0.30% for IMTM.

IMTM has the higher dividend yield at 4.41%, compared with 2.95% for FNDF.

IMTM is categorized as Momentum, while FNDF is Foreign Large Cap Equities. IMTM tracks MSCI World ex USA Momentum Index, while FNDF tracks RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity Developed ex US Large Index (Net). They also come from different issuers: iShares and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.30% for IMTM and 0.25% for FNDF.

FNDF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.43 vs 1.35), 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 IMTM and FNDF

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