Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
FNDX vs IJS: how they differ
FNDX and IJS hold 2% of their weight in the same names, and FNDX returned more over the year.
Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF and iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Value ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, FNDX and IJS hold 2% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | FNDX | IJS |
|---|---|---|
| Lumen Technologies Inc | 0.22% | 0.44% |
| Molina Healthcare Inc | 0.07% | 1.30% |
| Eastman Chemical Co | 0.06% | 0.84% |
| Kohl's Corp | 0.06% | 0.22% |
| SM Energy Co | 0.06% | 0.65% |
| United Natural Foods Inc | 0.06% | 0.30% |
| Vishay Intertechnology Inc | 0.06% | 0.73% |
| Celanese Corp | 0.05% | 0.55% |
| Organon & Co | 0.05% | 0.39% |
| World Kinect Corp | 0.05% | 0.18% |
| LKQ Corp | 0.05% | 0.73% |
| Qorvo Inc | 0.05% | 0.30% |
| Only in FNDX | Only in IJS |
|---|---|
| Apple Inc 4.64% | MATCH GROUP INC 0.97% |
| Intel Corp 2.57% | KULICKE AND SOFFA INDUSTRIES INC 0.77% |
| Alphabet Inc 2.38% | VICTORIA'S SECRET & COMPANY 0.72% |
| Microsoft Corp 2.33% | ENPHASE ENERGY INC 0.71% |
| Exxon Mobil Corp 2.29% | ULTRA CLEAN HOLDINGS INC 0.70% |
| Alphabet Inc 1.90% | MAXLINEAR INC 0.67% |
| Amazon.com Inc 1.86% | ATLANTIC UNION BANKSHARES CORP 0.66% |
| Micron Technology Inc 1.60% | ELEMENT SOLUTIONS INC 0.60% |
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 Jun 30, 2026 and May 31, 2026.
| FNDX Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF | IJS iShares S&P Small-Cap 600 Value ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | Schwab | iShares |
| What it is | Fundamental U.S. Large Company | S&P Small-Cap 600 Value |
| Total return, 1 year | +26.1% | +22.1% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +8.6 pts | +4.7 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.25% | 0.18% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 91.2% | 0.0% |
| Holdings | 733 | 461 |
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%.
IJS in plain words
IJS is an index equity fund tracking the S&P Small-Cap 600 Value. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +22.1% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.18% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 461 positions, with the top ten at 8.3%. It sat 4.3% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, FNDX or IJS?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FNDX returned +26.1% and IJS returned +22.1%, so FNDX returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, FNDX or IJS?
- FNDX charges 0.25% a year and IJS charges 0.18%, so IJS is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do FNDX and IJS overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 91% of FNDX and 0% of IJS by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 2% 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, FNDX against IJS, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/FNDX-IJS Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources