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 RDVY: how they differ

FNDX and RDVY hold 20% of their weight in the same names, and FNDX returned more over the year.

Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF and First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, FNDX and RDVY hold 20% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions FNDX and RDVY both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingFNDXRDVY
Alphabet Inc2.38%2.12%
Micron Technology Inc1.60%1.83%
Microsoft Corp2.33%1.45%
Apple Inc4.64%1.44%
JPMorgan Chase & Co1.38%1.91%
Meta Platforms Inc1.24%1.50%
Bank of America Corp0.87%1.96%
Wells Fargo & Co0.68%0.97%
NVIDIA Corp0.55%1.91%
Citigroup Inc0.85%0.54%
Costco Wholesale Corp0.53%1.73%
Elevance Health Inc0.51%0.54%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in FNDXOnly in RDVY
Intel Corp 2.57%CHUBB LTD (SWITZERLAND) 1.97%
Exxon Mobil Corp 2.29%ACCENTURE PLC 1.00%
Alphabet Inc 1.90%SOUTHWEST AIRLINES COMPANY 0.59%
Amazon.com Inc 1.86%EVEREST GROUP LTD 0.54%
Chevron Corp 1.49%WEATHERFORD INTERNATIONAL PLC 0.39%
Berkshire Hathaway Inc 1.41%
UnitedHealth Group Inc 1.37%
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 Jun 30, 2026 and May 31, 2026.

FNDX and RDVY on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
FNDX
Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF
RDVY
First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerSchwabFirst Trust
What it isFundamental U.S. Large CompanyFirst Rising Dividend Achievers
Total return, 1 year+26.1%+22.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+8.6 pts+4.5 pts
Expense ratio0.25%0.47%
Already in the S&P 50091.2%94.4%
Holdings73371

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%.

RDVY in plain words

RDVY is an index equity fund tracking the First Rising Dividend Achievers. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +22.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.47% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 94% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 71 positions, with the top ten at 28.6%. It sat 3.9% below its high of Aug 13, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, FNDX or RDVY?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FNDX returned +26.1% and RDVY returned +22.0%, so FNDX returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, FNDX or RDVY?
FNDX charges 0.25% a year and RDVY charges 0.47%, so FNDX is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do FNDX and RDVY overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 91% of FNDX and 94% of RDVY by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 20% 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 RDVY, 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 RDVY, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/FNDX-RDVY Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources