LOHA vs. FNDB
LOHA (Roundhill HALO ETF) and FNDB (Schwab Fundamental U.S. Broad Market Index ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - LOHA is a Large Cap Blend Equities fund tracking the Akros U.S. Heavy Assets Low Obsolescence (HALO) Index, while FNDB is a Large Cap Value Equities fund tracking the RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity US All Index. Both are passively managed. A 0.70 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. LOHA charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for FNDB.
Performance
LOHA vs. FNDB - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
LOHA
- 1D
- 1.56%
- 1M
- 2.99%
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
FNDB
- 1D
- 0.46%
- 1M
- 0.83%
- YTD
- 14.97%
- 6M
- 13.86%
- 1Y
- 30.64%
- 3Y*
- 20.21%
- 5Y*
- 12.78%
- 10Y*
- 14.55%
LOHA vs. FNDB - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | |
|---|---|
LOHA Roundhill HALO ETF | 2.99% |
FNDB Schwab Fundamental U.S. Broad Market Index ETF | 2.25% |
Correlation
The correlation between LOHA and FNDB is 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since May 14, 2026 | 0.70 |
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
LOHA vs. FNDB — Risk / Return Rank
LOHA
Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.
FNDB
LOHA vs. FNDB - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Roundhill HALO ETF (LOHA) and Schwab Fundamental U.S. Broad Market Index ETF (FNDB). 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.
| LOHA | FNDB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | — | 1.51 | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | — | 4.89 | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | — | 18.56 | — |
Loading charts...
Drawdowns
LOHA vs. FNDB - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum LOHA drawdown since its inception was -2.48%, smaller than the maximum FNDB drawdown of -38.17%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for LOHA and FNDB.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| LOHA | FNDB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -2.48% | -38.17% | +35.69% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | — | -6.29% | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | — | -16.83% | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | — | -19.29% | — |
Max Drawdown (10Y)Largest decline over 10 years | — | -38.17% | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | 0.00% | -0.97% | +0.97% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -0.90% | -3.65% | +2.75% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | — | 1.65% | — |
Volatility
LOHA vs. FNDB - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| LOHA | FNDB | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | — | 3.30% | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | — | 7.97% | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 15.09% | 10.93% | +4.16% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 15.09% | 15.35% | -0.26% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 15.09% | 17.46% | -2.37% |
LOHA vs. FNDB - Expense Ratio Comparison
LOHA has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than FNDB's 0.25% expense ratio.
Dividends
LOHA vs. FNDB - Dividend Comparison
LOHA has not paid dividends to shareholders, while FNDB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.46%.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FNDB Schwab Fundamental U.S. Broad Market Index ETF | 1.46% | 1.62% | 1.74% | 1.80% | 1.98% | 1.63% | 2.15% | 2.23% | 2.41% | 1.91% | 2.06% | 2.26% |
LOHA Roundhill HALO 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
LOHA and FNDB have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, FNDB is cheaper at 0.25% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
FNDB is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.35% for LOHA.
FNDB has the higher dividend yield at 1.46%, compared with 0.00% for LOHA.
LOHA is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while FNDB is Large Cap Value Equities. LOHA tracks Akros U.S. Heavy Assets Low Obsolescence (HALO) Index, while FNDB tracks RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity US All Index. They also come from different issuers: Roundhill and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for LOHA and 0.25% for FNDB.
Find the right allocation for LOHA and FNDB
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