RTH vs. FNDF
RTH (VanEck Vectors Retail ETF) and FNDF (Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - RTH is a Consumer Discretionary Equities fund tracking the MVIS US Listed Retail 25 Index, while FNDF is a Foreign Large Cap Equities fund tracking the RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity Developed ex US Large Index (Net). Both are passively managed. Over the past 10 years, RTH returned 14.35%/yr vs 12.34%/yr for FNDF. A 0.59 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. RTH charges 0.35%/yr vs 0.25%/yr for FNDF.
Performance
RTH vs. FNDF - Performance Comparison
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%
RTH vs. FNDF - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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
Consumer Defensive
Healthcare
Industrials
Basic Materials
-
Communication Services
-
Energy
-
Financial Services
-
Real Estate
-
Technology
-
Utilities
-
Consumer Cyclical
RTH
FNDF
Consumer Defensive
RTH
FNDF
Healthcare
RTH
FNDF
Industrials
RTH
FNDF
Basic Materials
RTH
-
FNDF
Communication Services
RTH
-
FNDF
Energy
RTH
-
FNDF
Financial Services
RTH
-
FNDF
Real Estate
RTH
-
FNDF
Technology
RTH
-
FNDF
Utilities
RTH
-
FNDF
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
RTH
FNDF
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.
| RTH | FNDF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
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
| RTH | FNDF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest 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 DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.58% | -1.94% | -1.64% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.34% | -7.63% | +0.29% |
Ulcer IndexDepth 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
| RTH | FNDF | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
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.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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.
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