QDF vs. FNDX

Last updated Jun 4, 2026

QDF (FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund) and FNDX (Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF) are both Large Cap Value Equities funds - QDF tracks the Northern Trust Quality Dividend Index while FNDX tracks the RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity US Large Index. Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, QDF returned 12.18%/yr vs 14.26%/yr for FNDX. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. QDF charges 0.37%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for FNDX.

Performance

QDF vs. FNDX - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund (QDF) and Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF (FNDX). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, QDF achieves a 10.70% return, which is significantly lower than FNDX's 14.57% return. Over the past 10 years, QDF has underperformed FNDX with an annualized return of 12.18%, while FNDX has yielded a comparatively higher 14.26% annualized return.

QDF

• 1D: -0.56%
• 1M: 4.60%
• YTD: 10.70%
• 6M: 10.82%
• 1Y: 27.64%
• 3Y*: 19.21%
• 5Y*: 11.90%
• 10Y*: 12.18%

FNDX

• 1D: -0.13%
• 1M: 3.88%
• YTD: 14.57%
• 6M: 14.58%
• 1Y: 32.32%
• 3Y*: 20.90%
• 5Y*: 12.82%
• 10Y*: 14.26%

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

QDF vs. FNDX - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017
QDF FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund	10.70%	16.58%	16.95%	19.71%	-12.13%	26.65%	4.86%	25.71%	-7.97%	17.42%
FNDX Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF	14.57%	16.94%	16.77%	18.23%	-6.92%	31.73%	9.12%	28.65%	-7.30%	17.12%

Correlation

The correlation between QDF and FNDX is 0.86, 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	0.86
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.90
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.93
Correlation (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.94
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 16, 2013	0.94

The correlation between QDF and FNDX has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.86 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

QDF vs. FNDX - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	QDF	FNDX
Technology	38.3%	19.1%
Financial Services	13.2%	14.1%
Industrials	8.9%	9.3%
Healthcare	8.3%	12.0%
Consumer Cyclical	6.9%	9.2%
Communication Services	6.8%	10.1%
Consumer Defensive	5.5%	7.4%
Real Estate	5.4%	1.8%
Utilities	2.1%	3.2%
Basic Materials	1.6%	3.7%
Energy	0.9%	10.3%

Return for Risk

QDF vs. FNDX — Risk / Return Rank

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

QDF

QDF Risk / Return Rank: 73
QDF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 73
QDF Sortino Ratio Rank: 73
QDF Omega Ratio Rank: 73
QDF Calmar Ratio Rank: 70
QDF Martin Ratio Rank: 78

FNDX

FNDX Risk / Return Rank: 90
FNDX Sharpe Ratio Rank: 90
FNDX Sortino Ratio Rank: 91
FNDX Omega Ratio Rank: 90
FNDX Calmar Ratio Rank: 89
FNDX Martin Ratio Rank: 90

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.

QDF vs. FNDX - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund (QDF) and Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF (FNDX). 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.

	QDF	FNDX	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.40	3.18	-0.79
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	3.36	4.47	-1.11
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.44	1.59	-0.15
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.52	5.35	-1.84
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	15.37	20.97	-5.59
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

QDF vs. FNDX - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current QDF Sharpe Ratio is 2.40, which is comparable to the FNDX Sharpe Ratio of 3.18. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of QDF and FNDX, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	QDF	FNDX	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.40	3.18	-0.79
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.77	0.85	-0.08
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	0.70	0.82	-0.11
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.78	0.79	-0.01

Drawdowns

QDF vs. FNDX - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum QDF drawdown since its inception was -36.67%, roughly equal to the maximum FNDX drawdown of -37.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for QDF and FNDX.

Drawdown Indicators

	QDF	FNDX	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-36.67%	-37.72%	+1.05%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-7.90%	-6.06%	-1.84%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-18.01%	-16.30%	-1.71%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-22.06%	-19.06%	-3.00%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-36.67%	-37.72%	+1.05%
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-0.56%	-0.13%	-0.43%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-3.65%	-3.55%	-0.10%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	1.80%	1.55%	+0.25%

Volatility

QDF vs. FNDX - Volatility Comparison

FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund (QDF) has a higher volatility of 2.95% compared to Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF (FNDX) at 2.25%. This indicates that QDF's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FNDX based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	QDF	FNDX	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	2.95%	2.25%	+0.70%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	8.76%	7.25%	+1.51%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	11.60%	10.22%	+1.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	15.60%	15.18%	+0.42%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	17.39%	17.50%	-0.11%

QDF vs. FNDX - Expense Ratio Comparison

QDF has a 0.37% expense ratio, which is higher than FNDX's 0.25% expense ratio.

Dividends

QDF vs. FNDX - Dividend Comparison

QDF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.50%, more than FNDX's 1.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
FNDX Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company Index ETF	1.45%	1.63%	1.76%	1.82%	2.07%	1.64%	2.29%	2.23%	2.40%	1.86%	2.01%	2.01%
QDF FlexShares Quality Dividend Index Fund	1.50%	1.65%	1.93%	2.19%	2.45%	1.90%	2.38%	3.05%	4.29%	2.70%	3.07%	3.04%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both QDF and FNDX in my portfolio?

QDF and FNDX have a correlation of 0.86, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, QDF or FNDX?

QDF has higher volatility (2.95%) compared to FNDX (2.25%). In terms of maximum drawdown, QDF dropped -36.67% vs FNDX's -37.72%.

Which ETF is better, QDF or FNDX?

On 10-year performance, FNDX leads with 14.26% vs 12.18% for QDF. On fees, FNDX is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, FNDX has been the lower-risk option at 2.25%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, QDF or FNDX?

Over the 10-year period, FNDX has performed better with a 14.26% return vs 12.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, QDF or FNDX?

FNDX is cheaper with a 0.25% expense ratio, compared with 0.37% for QDF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, QDF or FNDX?

QDF has the higher dividend yield at 1.50%, compared with 1.45% for FNDX.

What is the main difference between QDF and FNDX?

QDF tracks Northern Trust Quality Dividend Index, while FNDX tracks RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity US Large Index. They also come from different issuers: FlexShares and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.37% for QDF and 0.25% for FNDX.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

FNDX currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.18 vs 2.40), 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.