FNDB vs IVV
Schwab Fundamental US Broad Market ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. FNDB delivered stronger 1-year returns. FNDB offers more diversification with 1627 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FNDB | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.25% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $1.4B | $865.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.46% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 1,649 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +18.99% | +13.43% | |
| 1Y Return | +32.45% | +22.61% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.07% | +21.47% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.36% | +13.26% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.2% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -38.2% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Charles Schwab Asset Management | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Aug 15, 2013 | May 15, 2000 |
FNDB vs IVV Performance
Schwab Fundamental US Broad Market ETF (FNDB) is a ETF from Charles Schwab Asset Management and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year FNDB returned +32.45% while IVV returned +22.61%. Year to date, FNDB is up 18.99% versus a gain of 13.43% for IVV.
Over three years, FNDB compounded at +20.07% per year against +21.47% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +13.36% and +13.26% respectively. Across the full 13-year window we track, FNDB has the edge at +11.82% annualized vs +7.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FNDB has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.2% compared with 15.1% for IVV. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -38.2% for FNDB and -56.5% for IVV. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.94. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FNDB charges 0.25% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $25 vs $3 annually, a gap of $22 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FNDB currently yields 1.46% against 1.09% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
FNDB and IVV share 485 holdings out of 1647 unique holdings combined, representing a 56.5% weight overlap.
High overlap means holding both may not provide much additional diversification.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FNDB or IVV?
FNDB has an expense ratio of 0.25% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $22 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FNDB or IVV?
Over the past year FNDB returned +32.45% vs +22.61% for IVV, so FNDB leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (13 years), FNDB annualized +11.82% vs +7.03% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FNDB or IVV?
FNDB has been the more volatile fund at 15.2% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: FNDB -38.2% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both FNDB and IVV?
FNDB and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between FNDB and IVV?
FNDB and IVV share 485 common holdings with a 56.5% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 1647 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FNDB or IVV?
FNDB yields 1.46% while IVV yields 1.09%, so FNDB currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.