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 VO: how they differ

FNDX and VO hold 22% of their weight in the same names, and FNDX returned more over the year.

Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF and Vanguard Mid-Cap Index Fund.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, FNDX and VO hold 22% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions FNDX and VO both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingFNDXVO
Valero Energy Corp0.71%0.75%
General Motors Co0.74%0.67%
Marathon Petroleum Corp0.63%0.72%
Ford Motor Co0.60%0.53%
Phillips 660.47%0.66%
Target Corp0.40%0.57%
Nucor Corp0.39%0.49%
Archer-Daniels-Midland Co0.34%0.36%
FedEx Corp0.43%0.33%
Warner Bros Discovery Inc0.32%0.62%
Humana Inc0.32%0.46%
Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co0.29%0.58%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in FNDXOnly in VO
Apple Inc 4.64%Seagate Technology Holdings PLC 1.05%
Intel Corp 2.57%Datadog Inc 0.84%
Alphabet Inc 2.38%Bloom Energy Corp 0.79%
Microsoft Corp 2.33%Robinhood Markets Inc 0.77%
Exxon Mobil Corp 2.29%Cloudflare Inc 0.76%
Alphabet Inc 1.90%Coherent Corp 0.75%
Amazon.com Inc 1.86%Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd 0.74%
Micron Technology Inc 1.60%CRH PLC 0.69%

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 VO on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
FNDX
Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF
VO
Vanguard Mid-Cap Index Fund
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerSchwabVanguard
What it isFundamental U.S. Large CompanyMid-Cap
Total return, 1 year+26.1%+12.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+8.6 pts−5.5 pts
Expense ratio0.25%0.03%
Already in the S&P 50091.2%91.4%
Holdings733282

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%.

VO in plain words

VO is an index equity fund tracking the Mid-Cap. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +12.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.03% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 91% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 282 positions, with the top ten at 9.6%. It sat 4.1% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, FNDX or VO?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FNDX returned +26.1% and VO returned +12.0%, so FNDX returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, FNDX or VO?
FNDX charges 0.25% a year and VO charges 0.03%, so VO is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do FNDX and VO overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 91% of FNDX and 91% of VO by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 22% 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 VO, 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 VO, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/FNDX-VO Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources