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 VOO: how they differ

FNDX and VOO hold 62% of their weight in the same names, and FNDX returned more over the year.

Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF and Vanguard 500 Index Fund.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, FNDX and VOO hold 62% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions FNDX and VOO both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingFNDXVOO
Apple Inc4.64%6.61%
Alphabet Inc2.38%3.26%
Microsoft Corp2.33%4.31%
Alphabet Inc1.90%2.60%
Amazon.com Inc1.86%3.63%
Micron Technology Inc1.60%2.02%
Berkshire Hathaway Inc1.41%1.43%
JPMorgan Chase & Co1.38%1.26%
Meta Platforms Inc1.24%1.92%
Intel Corp2.57%1.03%
Johnson & Johnson0.97%0.95%
Exxon Mobil Corp2.29%0.88%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in FNDXOnly in VOO
Linde PLC 0.29%Palantir Technologies Inc 0.42%
Honeywell International Inc 0.29%Linde PLC 0.37%
Seagate Technology Holdings PLC 0.29%Seagate Technology Holdings PLC 0.34%
Accenture PLC 0.26%Crowdstrike Holdings Inc 0.30%
Lumen Technologies Inc 0.22%Eaton Corp PLC 0.26%
Bunge Global SA 0.20%AppLovin Corp 0.21%
LyondellBasell Industries NV 0.19%Chubb Ltd 0.19%
Chubb Ltd 0.18%Trane Technologies PLC 0.17%

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 VOO on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
FNDX
Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF
VOO
Vanguard 500 Index Fund
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerSchwabVanguard
What it isFundamental U.S. Large CompanyS&P 500
Total return, 1 year+26.1%+17.6%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+8.6 pts+0.1 pts
Expense ratio0.25%0.03%
Already in the S&P 50091.2%100.0%
Holdings733506

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%.

VOO in plain words

VOO is an index equity fund tracking the S&P 500. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.6% 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, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 506 positions, with the top ten at 36.5%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, FNDX or VOO?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FNDX returned +26.1% and VOO returned +17.6%, so FNDX returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, FNDX or VOO?
FNDX charges 0.25% a year and VOO charges 0.03%, so VOO is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do FNDX and VOO overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 91% of FNDX and 100% of VOO by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 62% 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 VOO, 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 VOO, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/FNDX-VOO Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources