ABFL vs VOO
Abacus FCF Leaders ETF vs Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, ABFL or VOO?
Nearly the same fund. VOO costs less.
VOO has a lower expense ratio. VOO led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.95. ABFL is less concentrated, with 33.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.6%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ABFL | VOO |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.49% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $528M | $997.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.54% | 1.04% |
| Holdings | 60 | 509 |
| YTD Return | +13.65% | +14.14%Best |
| 1Y Return | +12.23% | +17.31%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +17.35% | +23.16%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.02% | +13.85%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.8% | 15.4%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -35.0% | -34.3%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $16,866 | $19,128Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 33.0%Best | 37.6% |
| Fund Family | FCF Advisors | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Sep 27, 2016 | Sep 7, 2010 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 28, 2016 to Sep 21, 2026 (10 years).
ABFL vs VOO growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 10 years both funds cover.
ABFL vs VOO Performance
Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) is an ETF from FCF Advisors and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year ABFL returned +12.23% while VOO returned +17.31%. Year to date, ABFL is up 13.65% versus a gain of 14.14% for VOO.
Over three years, ABFL compounded at +17.35% per year against +23.16% for VOO; over five years the annualized figures are +11.02% and +13.85% respectively. Across the full 10-year window we track, VOO has the edge at +14.53% annualized vs +13.99%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ABFL has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.8% compared with 15.4% for VOO. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -35.0% for ABFL and -34.3% for VOO. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.95. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ABFL charges 0.49% per year while VOO charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $49 vs $3 annually, a gap of $46 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ABFL currently yields 0.54% against 1.04% for VOO.
Holdings Overlap
78.1% of ABFL's money is in holdings VOO also owns. 27.2% of VOO's money is in holdings ABFL also owns.
Most of ABFL is already inside VOO. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
38 positions in common, counted across the 56 positions we hold weights for in ABFL and 494 in VOO, against full books of 60 and 509.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 449 positions for VOO that do not appear in our book for ABFL (72.0% of the fund), and 16 for ABFL that do not appear in VOO (18.0%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in ABFL | Weight in VOO | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 4.97% | 7.55% | 2.58% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 5.23% | 7.05% | 1.82% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.48% | 2.86% | 0.62% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 2.95% | 1.41% | 1.54% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 2.89% | 0.69% | 2.20% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 2.70% | 0.72% | 1.98% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 2.40% | 0.93% | 1.47% |
| LRCXLrcx Uw Equity | 2.61% | 0.57% | 2.04% |
| BMYBristol-Myers Squibb Co. | 2.92% | 0.21% | 2.71% |
| PANWPalo Alto Networks, Inc | 2.56% | 0.42% | 2.14% |
78.1% of ABFL is already inside VOO.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ABFL or VOO?
ABFL has an expense ratio of 0.49% while VOO charges 0.03%. VOO is the cheaper option, by $46 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, ABFL or VOO?
Over the past year ABFL returned +12.23% vs +17.31% for VOO, so VOO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (10 years), ABFL annualized +13.99% vs +14.53% for VOO. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, ABFL or VOO?
ABFL has been the more volatile fund at 15.8% annualized versus 15.4% for VOO. Worst drawdown: ABFL -35.0% vs VOO -34.3%.
Should I hold both ABFL and VOO?
ABFL and VOO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.95, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between ABFL and VOO?
78.1% of ABFL's money is in holdings VOO also owns. 27.2% of VOO's is in holdings ABFL also owns. They hold 38 positions in common, counted across the 56 positions we hold weights for in ABFL and 494 in VOO.
Which pays a higher dividend, ABFL or VOO?
ABFL yields 0.54% while VOO yields 1.04%, so VOO currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VOO better than ABFL?
VOO has a lower expense ratio. VOO led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.95. ABFL is less concentrated, with 33.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.