Data as of Oct 28, 2026.
FNDA vs IWM: Differences, Returns & Fees
Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, FNDA returned +16.4% to IWM's +14.1%; 34% of their weight is in the same names.
askIQ about this page
askIQ about FNDA and IWM
Net assets: $9.1bn on Aug 31, 2026 for Schwab Fundamental U.S. Small Company ETF, and $75.5bn on Oct 27, 2026 for iShares Russell 2000 ETF.
Pair scorecard
IWM costs 0.06 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 2.3 points.
| Measure | FNDA | IWM |
|---|---|---|
| Return | ||
| Total return, 1 year | +16.4% | +14.1% |
| Drawdown | ||
| Below its high | 6.3%, high on Aug 14, 2026 | 7.6%, high on Aug 14, 2026 |
| Benchmark | ||
| What it tracks | not read by ETFIQ | Russell 2000 Index |
| Cost and size | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.25% | 0.19% |
| Net assets, FNDA as of Aug 31, 2026 and IWM as of Oct 27, 2026 | $9.1bn | $75.5bn |
| Holdings | ||
| Holdings in common | 34% | |
| Top ten holdings, share of the fund | 3.8% | 3.3% |
Holdings in common uses holdings dated Aug 31, 2026 and Oct 27, 2026. Method
What they share
By the books each fund has filed, FNDA and IWM hold 34% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Aug 31, 2026 and Oct 27, 2026.
half
34% in common
Only in one fund ↓
Side by side
FNDA and IWM on the fields both publish, as of Oct 28, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
FNDA and IWM are built for the same job. How do they differ in cost, holdings and results?
- Holdings in common. 34% of the weight is in the same securities (holdings dated Aug 31, 2026 and Oct 27, 2026).
- One-year total return. Over 1 year to Oct 28, 2026 FNDA returned +16.4% and IWM +14.1% with distributions reinvested, a gap of 2.3 points.
- Number of holdings (similar). FNDA holds 913 positions and IWM holds 1977.
Data as of Oct 28, 2026.
The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.
FNDA
FNDA tracks an index. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +16.4% with distributions reinvested, against +13.7% for its benchmark, the S&P 500 Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.25% a year. By its holdings filed for Aug 31, 2026, 7% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 913 positions, with the top ten at 3.8%. It sat 6.3% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Oct 28, 2026.
IWM
IWM tracks the Russell 2000. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +14.1% with distributions reinvested, against +14.3% for its benchmark, the Russell 2000 Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.19% a year. By its holdings published by its issuer for Oct 27, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1,977 positions, with the top ten at 3.3%. It sat 7.6% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Oct 28, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, FNDA or IWM?
- In the year to Oct 28, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FNDA returned +16.4% and IWM +14.1%.
- Which is cheaper, FNDA or IWM?
- IWM is cheaper, by 0.06 percentage points a year. That is about $6 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Links are sources, not endorsements. A comparison is not a recommendation.
How this is computed
Overlap adds up the smaller of the two weights for each security both funds hold.
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown
ETFIQ, FNDA against IWM, data as of Oct 28, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/fnda-vs-iwm
ETFIQ. (Oct 28, 2026). FNDA against IWM. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/any/fnda-vs-iwm
[FNDA against IWM (ETFIQ, Oct 28, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/any/fnda-vs-iwm)
Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.