Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

FDVV vs FNDX: how they differ

FDVV and FNDX hold 28% of their weight in the same names, and FNDX returned more over the year.

Fidelity High Dividend ETF and Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, FDVV and FNDX hold 28% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions FDVV and FNDX both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingFDVVFNDX
APPLE INC5.70%4.64%
MICROSOFT CORP4.50%2.33%
ALPHABET INC2.21%2.38%
JPMORGAN CHASE and CO2.58%1.38%
BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION1.78%0.87%
META PLATFORMS INC0.74%1.24%
WELLS FARGO and CO1.52%0.68%
PROCTER and GAMBLE CO1.81%0.66%
BROADCOM INC3.50%0.65%
FORD MOTOR CO1.26%0.60%
GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC (THE)1.71%0.58%
NVIDIA CORP6.86%0.55%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in FDVVOnly in FNDX
ORKLA ASA 1.37%Intel Corp 2.57%
BANCA MONTE DEI PASCHI DI SIENA SPA 1.26%Exxon Mobil Corp 2.29%
DANSKE BANK A/S 1.24%Alphabet Inc 1.90%
BANCO BPM SPA 1.18%Amazon.com Inc 1.86%
STELLANTIS NV 0.96%Micron Technology Inc 1.60%
OMEGA HEALTHCARE INVESTORS INC 0.88%Chevron Corp 1.49%
ACCENTURE PLC 0.73%Berkshire Hathaway Inc 1.41%
MITSUI OSK LINES LTD 0.22%Walmart Inc 1.01%

Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Apr 30, 2026 and May 31, 2026.

FDVV and FNDX on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
FDVV
Fidelity High Dividend ETF
FNDX
Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerFidelitySchwab
What it isHigh DividendFundamental U.S. Large Company
Total return, 1 year+17.2%+26.1%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−0.3 pts+8.6 pts
Expense ratio0.15%0.25%
Already in the S&P 50086.7%91.2%
Holdings96733

FDVV in plain words

FDVV is an index equity fund tracking the High Dividend. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 87% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 96 positions, with the top ten at 32.5%.

FNDX in plain words

FNDX is an index equity fund tracking the Fundamental U.S. Large Company. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +26.1% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.25% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 91% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 733 positions, with the top ten at 22.5%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, FDVV or FNDX?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FDVV returned +17.2% and FNDX returned +26.1%, so FNDX returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, FDVV or FNDX?
FDVV charges 0.15% a year and FNDX charges 0.25%, so FDVV is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do FDVV and FNDX overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 87% of FDVV and 91% of FNDX by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 28% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.

Other comparisons

Where to next

Where these figures came from

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.

FDVV against FNDX, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, FDVV against FNDX, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/FDVV-FNDX Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources