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

Performance

VEA vs. FNDF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (VEA) 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, VEA achieves a 16.41% return, which is significantly lower than FNDF's 21.61% return. Over the past 10 years, VEA has underperformed FNDF with an annualized return of 10.24%, while FNDF has yielded a comparatively higher 11.88% annualized return.


VEA

1D
1.66%
1M
1.99%
6M
9.00%
YTD
16.41%
1Y
30.82%
3Y*
19.75%
5Y*
9.94%
10Y*
10.24%
ALL TIME*
5.25%

FNDF

1D
1.05%
1M
3.66%
6M
11.47%
YTD
21.61%
1Y
40.29%
3Y*
22.97%
5Y*
14.25%
10Y*
11.88%
ALL TIME*
9.16%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

Liquidity Comparison


PositionAvg. Volume Value (2W)Avg. Volume Value (1M)Avg. Volume Value (3M)
$78.52M$73.23M$75.50M
$653.63M$753.15M$792.32M

VEA vs. FNDF - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
VEA
Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF
16.41%35.16%3.15%17.93%-15.34%11.66%9.71%22.62%-14.75%26.42%
FNDF
Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF
21.61%40.99%2.29%20.22%-7.78%14.97%3.61%18.46%-14.21%23.98%

Correlation

The correlation between VEA and FNDF is 0.96 - they have historically moved very closely together. At this level, their price movements offset little of one another.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Focuses on recent behavior, but can change the most.

0.96

Correlation (3Y)
Balances recent behavior with more history.

0.97

Correlation (5Y)
Shows whether the relationship held over a longer period.

0.97

Correlation (10Y)
Provides a long-term view across more market conditions.

0.97

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

0.97

The correlation between VEA and FNDF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.96 to 0.97 - a consistent structural relationship.

VEA vs. FNDF - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
VEA
FNDF

Financial Services

23.1%
20.2%

Technology

18.4%
11.5%

Industrials

17.9%
12.8%

Healthcare

7.9%
6.0%

Consumer Cyclical

7.3%
8.2%

Basic Materials

6.9%
10.0%

Consumer Defensive

5.3%
6.2%

Energy

4.5%
10.6%

Communication Services

3.2%
3.4%

Utilities

3.1%
4.3%

Real Estate

2.5%
0.9%

Financial Services

VEA
23.1%
FNDF
20.2%

Technology

VEA
18.4%
FNDF
11.5%

Industrials

VEA
17.9%
FNDF
12.8%

Healthcare

VEA
7.9%
FNDF
6.0%

Consumer Cyclical

VEA
7.3%
FNDF
8.2%

Basic Materials

VEA
6.9%
FNDF
10.0%

Consumer Defensive

VEA
5.3%
FNDF
6.2%

Energy

VEA
4.5%
FNDF
10.6%

Communication Services

VEA
3.2%
FNDF
3.4%

Utilities

VEA
3.1%
FNDF
4.3%

Real Estate

VEA
2.5%
FNDF
0.9%

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

VEA vs. FNDF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare historical risk-adjusted metric ranks over the past 12 months.

VEA
VEA Risk / Return Rank: 6969
Overall Rank
VEA Sharpe Ratio Rank: 7070
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VEA Sortino Ratio Rank: 6767
Sortino Ratio Rank
VEA Omega Ratio Rank: 6969
Omega Ratio Rank
VEA Calmar Ratio Rank: 6868
Calmar Ratio Rank
VEA Martin Ratio Rank: 7272
Martin Ratio Rank

FNDF
FNDF Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
FNDF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 9191
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FNDF Sortino Ratio Rank: 8888
Sortino Ratio Rank
FNDF Omega Ratio Rank: 9090
Omega Ratio Rank
FNDF Calmar Ratio Rank: 8888
Calmar Ratio Rank
FNDF Martin Ratio Rank: 8585
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) uses a weighted average of the Sharpe, Sortino, Omega, Calmar, and Martin percentile ranks for the trailing 12 months. Higher means stronger historical risk-adjusted performance within the peer group.

VEA vs. FNDF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (VEA) 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.


VEAFNDFDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.71

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.80

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.33

1.45

-0.13

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.66

3.82

-1.16

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

9.95

13.38

-3.43

VEA vs. FNDF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VEA Sharpe Ratio is 1.80, which is comparable to the FNDF Sharpe Ratio of 2.50. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VEA 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

VEA vs. FNDF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VEA drawdown since its inception was -60.68%, which is greater than FNDF's maximum drawdown of -40.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VEA and FNDF.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


VEAFNDFDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-60.68%

-40.14%

-20.54%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-11.63%

-10.60%

-1.03%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-13.45%

-13.89%

+0.44%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.71%

-25.56%

-4.15%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-35.73%

-40.14%

+4.41%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.23%

-0.35%

+0.12%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-13.19%

-7.58%

-5.61%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.11%

3.02%

+0.09%

Volatility

VEA vs. FNDF - Volatility Comparison

Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF (VEA) has a higher volatility of 5.44% compared to Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF (FNDF) at 4.30%. This indicates that VEA's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FNDF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


VEAFNDFDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.44%

4.30%

+1.14%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.43%

14.22%

+1.21%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

17.29%

16.20%

+1.09%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

16.86%

16.35%

+0.51%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

17.22%

17.44%

-0.22%

VEA vs. FNDF - Expense Ratio Comparison

VEA has a 0.03% expense ratio, which is lower than FNDF's 0.25% expense ratio. Despite the difference, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

VEA vs. FNDF - Dividend Comparison

VEA's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.51%, less than FNDF's 2.99% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
FNDF
Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF
2.99%3.44%4.01%3.41%3.10%3.54%2.17%3.20%3.47%2.32%2.42%2.08%
VEA
Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF
2.51%3.22%3.35%3.15%2.91%3.16%2.04%3.04%3.35%2.77%3.05%2.92%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.96, VEA and FNDF move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

VEA has higher volatility (5.44%) compared to FNDF (4.30%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VEA dropped -60.68% vs FNDF's -40.14%.

On 10-year performance, FNDF leads with 11.88% vs 10.24% for VEA. On fees, VEA is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, FNDF has been the lower-risk option at 4.30%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, FNDF has performed better with a 11.88% return vs 10.24%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VEA is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.25% for FNDF.

FNDF has the higher dividend yield at 2.99%, compared with 2.51% for VEA.

VEA tracks FTSE Developed All Cap ex US Index, while FNDF tracks RAFI Fundamental High Liquidity Developed ex US Large Index (Net). They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.03% for VEA and 0.25% for FNDF.

FNDF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.50 vs 1.80), 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 VEA 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