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

FNDX vs MOAT: how they differ

FNDX and MOAT hold 10% of their weight in the same names, and FNDX returned more over the year.

Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF and VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, FNDX and MOAT hold 10% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions FNDX and MOAT both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingFNDXMOAT
Microsoft Corp2.33%2.20%
Amazon.com Inc1.86%1.33%
Meta Platforms Inc1.24%1.17%
Broadcom Inc0.65%2.43%
NVIDIA Corp0.55%2.45%
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co0.53%2.43%
Applied Materials Inc0.47%2.34%
PepsiCo Inc0.41%1.17%
Walt Disney Co/The0.35%1.19%
Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc0.29%1.18%
US Bancorp0.24%1.39%
Mondelez International Inc0.21%2.34%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in FNDXOnly in MOAT
Apple Inc 4.64%Datadog Inc 2.44%
Intel Corp 2.57%Veeva Systems Inc 2.41%
Alphabet Inc 2.38%Tyler Technologies Inc 2.15%
Exxon Mobil Corp 2.29%Fair Isaac Corp 2.14%
Alphabet Inc 1.90%Entegris Inc 1.73%
Micron Technology Inc 1.60%NXP Semiconductors NV 1.60%
Chevron Corp 1.49%MercadoLibre Inc 1.28%
Berkshire Hathaway Inc 1.41%Guidewire Software Inc 1.18%

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 and MOAT on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
FNDX
Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF
MOAT
VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerSchwabVanEck
What it isFundamental U.S. Large CompanyMorningstar Wide Moat
Total return, 1 year+26.1%+11.3%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+8.6 pts−6.2 pts
Expense ratio0.25%0.46%
Already in the S&P 50091.2%91.6%
Holdings73355

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%.

MOAT in plain words

MOAT is an index equity fund tracking the Morningstar Wide Moat. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +11.3% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.46% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 92% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 55 positions, with the top ten at 25.3%. It sat 5.7% below its high of Aug 27, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, FNDX or MOAT?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FNDX returned +26.1% and MOAT returned +11.3%, so FNDX returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, FNDX or MOAT?
FNDX charges 0.25% a year and MOAT charges 0.46%, so FNDX is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do FNDX and MOAT overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 91% of FNDX and 92% of MOAT by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 10% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources