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

Performance

RTH vs. FNDF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) 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, RTH achieves a 4.33% return, which is significantly lower than FNDF's 19.66% return. Over the past 10 years, RTH has outperformed FNDF with an annualized return of 14.35%, while FNDF has yielded a comparatively lower 12.34% annualized return.


RTH

1D
-0.06%
1M
-1.59%
YTD
4.33%
6M
2.84%
1Y
12.87%
3Y*
16.16%
5Y*
9.69%
10Y*
14.35%

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)

RTH vs. FNDF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
RTH
VanEck Vectors Retail ETF
4.33%12.36%20.02%20.07%-17.67%24.94%31.62%29.06%3.87%22.45%
FNDF
Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF
19.66%40.99%2.29%20.22%-7.78%14.97%3.61%18.46%-14.21%23.98%

Correlation

The correlation between RTH and FNDF is 0.42, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.42

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

0.51

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

0.57

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

0.58

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 15, 2013

0.59

The correlation between RTH and FNDF shifts across timeframes, from 0.42 (1 year) to 0.59 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

RTH vs. FNDF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
RTH
FNDF

Consumer Cyclical

57.2%
10.8%

Consumer Defensive

26.8%
6.5%

Healthcare

13.4%
5.2%

Industrials

2.6%
15.5%

Basic Materials

-

11.3%

Communication Services

-

4.9%

Energy

-

10.9%

Financial Services

-

16.2%

Real Estate

-

0.8%

Technology

-

14.4%

Utilities

-

3.5%

Consumer Cyclical

RTH
57.2%
FNDF
10.8%

Consumer Defensive

RTH
26.8%
FNDF
6.5%

Healthcare

RTH
13.4%
FNDF
5.2%

Industrials

RTH
2.6%
FNDF
15.5%

Basic Materials

RTH

-

FNDF
11.3%

Communication Services

RTH

-

FNDF
4.9%

Energy

RTH

-

FNDF
10.9%

Financial Services

RTH

-

FNDF
16.2%

Real Estate

RTH

-

FNDF
0.8%

Technology

RTH

-

FNDF
14.4%

Utilities

RTH

-

FNDF
3.5%

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

RTH vs. FNDF — Risk / Return Rank

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

RTH
RTH Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
RTH Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3030
Sharpe Ratio Rank
RTH Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
RTH Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
RTH Calmar Ratio Rank: 3434
Calmar Ratio Rank
RTH Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
Martin Ratio Rank

FNDF
FNDF Risk / Return Rank: 8585
Overall Rank
FNDF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8888
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FNDF Sortino Ratio Rank: 8585
Sortino Ratio Rank
FNDF Omega Ratio Rank: 8686
Omega Ratio Rank
FNDF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8282
Calmar Ratio Rank
FNDF Martin Ratio Rank: 8282
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.

RTH vs. FNDF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) 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.


RTHFNDFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-1.56

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.79

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.18

1.45

-0.28

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.50

3.82

-2.32

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

4.99

14.27

-9.28

RTH vs. FNDF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current RTH Sharpe Ratio is 0.97, which is lower than the FNDF Sharpe Ratio of 2.53. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of RTH 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

RTH vs. FNDF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum RTH drawdown since its inception was -42.32%, which is greater than FNDF's maximum drawdown of -40.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for RTH and FNDF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


RTHFNDFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-42.32%

-40.14%

-2.18%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-7.83%

-10.60%

+2.77%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.80%

-13.89%

+0.09%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.00%

-25.56%

+0.56%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-25.00%

-40.14%

+15.14%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.58%

-1.94%

-1.64%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-7.34%

-7.63%

+0.29%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

2.35%

2.84%

-0.49%

Volatility

RTH vs. FNDF - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for VanEck Vectors Retail ETF (RTH) is 3.85%, while Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) has a volatility of 6.65%. This indicates that RTH experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than FNDF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


RTHFNDFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.85%

6.65%

-2.80%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.28%

13.64%

-4.36%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

12.09%

16.00%

-3.91%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.81%

16.35%

+0.46%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.54%

17.71%

-0.17%

RTH vs. FNDF - Expense Ratio Comparison

RTH has a 0.35% expense ratio, which is higher than FNDF's 0.25% expense ratio.


Dividends

RTH vs. FNDF - Dividend Comparison

RTH's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.93%, less than FNDF's 2.87% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
RTH
VanEck Vectors Retail ETF
0.93%0.97%0.77%1.07%1.16%0.78%0.64%0.91%1.05%1.56%1.84%2.25%

Frequently Asked Questions


RTH and FNDF have a correlation of 0.42, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

FNDF has higher volatility (6.65%) compared to RTH (3.85%). In terms of maximum drawdown, RTH dropped -42.32% vs FNDF's -40.14%.

On 10-year performance, RTH leads with 14.35% vs 12.34% for FNDF. On fees, FNDF is cheaper at 0.25% per year. On volatility, RTH has been the lower-risk option at 3.85%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, RTH has performed better with a 14.35% return vs 12.34%. 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 0.35% for RTH.

FNDF has the higher dividend yield at 2.87%, compared with 0.93% for RTH.

RTH is categorized as Consumer Discretionary Equities, while FNDF is Foreign Large Cap Equities. RTH tracks MVIS US Listed Retail 25 Index, while FNDF tracks RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity Developed ex US Large Index (Net). They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.35% for RTH and 0.25% for FNDF.

FNDF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.53 vs 0.97), 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 RTH 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