FNDA vs RSSL
Schwab Fundamental US Small Company ETF vs Global X Russell 2000 ETF
Which is better, FNDA or RSSL?
Nearly the same fund. RSSL costs less.
RSSL has a lower expense ratio. FNDA led over 1Y, RSSL over the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.95.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FNDA | RSSL |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.25% | 0.08%Best |
| AUM | $8.8B | $1.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.26% | 1.29% |
| Holdings | 918 | 1,981 |
| YTD Return | +11.40%Best | +9.62% |
| 1Y Return | +15.53%Best | +10.21% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.25% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.71% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.8%Best | 18.4% |
| Max Drawdown | -25.9%Best | -28.2% |
| $10,000 over 2.4 years | $13,084 | $13,575Best |
| Fund Family | Charles Schwab Asset Management | Global X by mirae Asset |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Small Cap Blend | Small Cap Blend |
| Inception | Aug 15, 2013 | Jun 4, 2024 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.4 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 5, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (2.4 years).
FNDA vs RSSL growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 2.4 years both funds cover.
FNDA vs RSSL Performance
Schwab Fundamental US Small Company ETF (FNDA) is an ETF from Charles Schwab Asset Management and Global X Russell 2000 ETF (RSSL) is an ETF from Global X by mirae Asset. Over the past year FNDA returned +15.53% while RSSL returned +10.21%. Year to date, FNDA is up 11.40% versus a gain of 9.62% for RSSL.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
RSSL has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.4% compared with 16.8% for FNDA. 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 -25.9% for FNDA and -28.2% for RSSL. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.95. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FNDA charges 0.25% per year while RSSL charges 0.08%. On a $10,000 position that is $25 vs $8 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FNDA currently yields 1.26% against 1.29% for RSSL.
Holdings Overlap
At least 49.1% of FNDA's money is in holdings RSSL also owns.
Stated as a floor: for RSSL, our book for it covers 90.4% of that fund, so a holding it does not list is one we cannot count as shared. The real figure is this or higher.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
502 positions in common, counted across the 910 positions we hold weights for in FNDA and 1,560 in RSSL, against full books of 918 and 1,981.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in FNDA | Weight in RSSL | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| ANFAbercrombie & Fitch Co. Class A | 0.40% | 0.21% | 0.19% |
| MOG.AMoog Inccommon Stock | 0.25% | 0.34% | 0.09% |
| VSATViasat Inc | 0.28% | 0.31% | 0.03% |
| COMPSturm Ruger & Company Inc. | 0.33% | 0.25% | 0.08% |
| VSCOVictoria'S Secret & Co Common Stock USD 0.01 | 0.40% | 0.17% | 0.23% |
| TEXTerex Corp | 0.28% | 0.23% | 0.05% |
| ENSEnersys | 0.28% | 0.22% | 0.06% |
| UMBFUmb Financial Corp. | 0.15% | 0.34% | 0.19% |
| FCFSFirstcash Inc | 0.18% | 0.31% | 0.13% |
| PLXSPlexus Corp | 0.25% | 0.23% | 0.02% |
49.1% of FNDA is already inside RSSL.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FNDA or RSSL?
FNDA has an expense ratio of 0.25% while RSSL charges 0.08%. RSSL is the cheaper option, by $17 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FNDA or RSSL?
Over the past year FNDA returned +15.53% vs +10.21% for RSSL, so FNDA leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), FNDA annualized +11.85% vs +13.58% for RSSL. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FNDA or RSSL?
RSSL has been the more volatile fund at 18.4% annualized versus 16.8% for FNDA. Worst drawdown: FNDA -25.9% vs RSSL -28.2%.
Should I hold both FNDA and RSSL?
FNDA and RSSL have a monthly-return correlation of 0.95, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between FNDA and RSSL?
At least 49.1% of FNDA's money is in holdings RSSL also owns. Our book for RSSL is partial, so the real figure is this or higher. They hold 502 positions in common, counted across the 910 positions we hold weights for in FNDA and 1,560 in RSSL.
Which pays a higher dividend, FNDA or RSSL?
FNDA yields 1.26% while RSSL yields 1.29%, so RSSL currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is RSSL better than FNDA?
RSSL has a lower expense ratio. FNDA led over 1Y, RSSL over the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.95. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.