PRFZ vs. FNDA
Compare and contrast key facts about Invesco FTSE RAFI US 1500 Small-Mid ETF (PRFZ) and Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF (FNDA).
PRFZ and FNDA are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. PRFZ is a passively managed fund by Invesco that tracks the performance of the FTSE RAFI US 1500 Small-Mid Index. It was launched on Sep 20, 2006. FNDA is a passively managed fund by Charles Schwab that tracks the performance of the Russell RAFI Small Company US. It was launched on Aug 15, 2013. Both PRFZ and FNDA are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.
Scroll down to visually compare performance, riskiness, drawdowns, and other indicators and decide which better suits your portfolio: PRFZ or FNDA.
Key characteristics
| PRFZ | FNDA | |
|---|---|---|
| YTD Return | 19.36% | 15.53% |
| 1Y Return | 41.36% | 36.36% |
| 3Y Return (Ann) | 4.94% | 5.19% |
| 5Y Return (Ann) | 12.33% | 12.21% |
| 10Y Return (Ann) | 9.78% | 10.07% |
| Sharpe Ratio | 2.02 | 1.87 |
| Sortino Ratio | 2.87 | 2.70 |
| Omega Ratio | 1.35 | 1.33 |
| Calmar Ratio | 2.21 | 2.40 |
| Martin Ratio | 12.15 | 10.73 |
| Ulcer Index | 3.41% | 3.35% |
| Daily Std Dev | 20.50% | 19.24% |
| Max Drawdown | -62.42% | -44.64% |
| Current Drawdown | -1.38% | -1.35% |
Correlation
The correlation between PRFZ and FNDA is 0.98, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.
Performance
PRFZ vs. FNDA - Performance Comparison
In the year-to-date period, PRFZ achieves a 19.36% return, which is significantly higher than FNDA's 15.53% return. Both investments have delivered pretty close results over the past 10 years, with PRFZ having a 9.78% annualized return and FNDA not far ahead at 10.07%. The chart below displays the growth of a $10,000 investment in both assets, with all prices adjusted for splits and dividends.
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
PRFZ vs. FNDA - Expense Ratio Comparison
PRFZ has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than FNDA's 0.25% expense ratio.
Risk-Adjusted Performance
PRFZ vs. FNDA - Risk-Adjusted Performance Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco FTSE RAFI US 1500 Small-Mid ETF (PRFZ) and Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF (FNDA). 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.
Dividends
PRFZ vs. FNDA - Dividend Comparison
PRFZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.11%, less than FNDA's 1.67% yield.
| TTM | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PRFZ Invesco FTSE RAFI US 1500 Small-Mid ETF | 1.11% | 1.42% | 1.33% | 0.93% | 0.91% | 1.29% | 1.37% | 0.97% | 1.31% | 1.39% | 1.14% | 0.93% |
FNDA Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF | 1.67% | 1.96% | 2.04% | 1.98% | 1.71% | 2.23% | 2.31% | 2.02% | 1.83% | 2.39% | 1.91% | 0.40% |
Drawdowns
PRFZ vs. FNDA - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum PRFZ drawdown since its inception was -62.42%, which is greater than FNDA's maximum drawdown of -44.64%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for PRFZ and FNDA. For additional features, visit the drawdowns tool.
Volatility
PRFZ vs. FNDA - Volatility Comparison
Invesco FTSE RAFI US 1500 Small-Mid ETF (PRFZ) has a higher volatility of 6.85% compared to Schwab Fundamental US Small Co. Index ETF (FNDA) at 6.45%. This indicates that PRFZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FNDA based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.