ETF comparison
FNDF vs IPAC
Both International Developed.
Schwab Fundamental International Equity ETF · iShares Core MSCI Pacific ETF
Holdings overlap
0 positions appear in both funds. Buying equal dollars of FNDF and IPAC would leave roughly 0.0% of each dollar exposed to the same underlying securities.
Holdings data for FNDF covers 0.0% of fund weight. The remainder lacks matchable identifiers in the N-PORT filing.
Holdings data for IPAC covers 0.0% of fund weight. The remainder lacks matchable identifiers in the N-PORT filing.
Side by side
Sub-score comparison
Tracking-quality sub-score is not yet computed for any fund — see methodology for which inputs are live.
Cost difference
IPAC is 16 bps cheaper than FNDF. On a $100,000 position that's about $160/yr more in fees for FNDF.
Fee figure is the annual expense charged on $100,000. It compounds over time — we publish a fuller cost-projection calculator on the methodology page.
Top shared holdings
0 shared in totalNo shared holdings between these funds.
Only in FNDF
0 totalEvery FNDF position is also held by IPAC.
Only in IPAC
0 totalEvery IPAC position is also held by FNDF.
Holdings overlap is the sum of min(weight_a, weight_b) over positions
matched on ISIN (CUSIP fallback). Methodology: see
/methodology/.
Comparing two funds doesn't endorse swapping one for the other. Tax-lot history, account type, and personal goals matter — PlainIndex publishes data and methodology, not investment advice.