AUGW vs VXUS
AllianzIM US Equity Buffer20 Aug ETF vs Vanguard Total International Stock ETF
Which is better, AUGW or VXUS?
Multi Alternative against Large Cap Blend.
VXUS has a lower expense ratio. VXUS led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window.
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 | AUGW | VXUS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.74% | 0.05%Best |
| AUM | $126M | $158.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 2.51% |
| Holdings | 5 | 8,747 |
| YTD Return | +6.46% | +13.64%Best |
| 1Y Return | +8.94% | +20.82%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +11.91% | +19.58%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +9.14% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 5.6%Best | 12.0% |
| Max Drawdown | -8.8%Best | -13.6% |
| $10,000 over 3.1 years | $13,812 | $16,395Best |
| Fund Family | AllianzIM | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Alternative | Equity |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jul 31, 2023 | Jan 26, 2011 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.1 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 1, 2023 to Sep 17, 2026 (3.1 years).
AUGW vs VXUS 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 3.1 years both funds cover.
AUGW vs VXUS Performance
AllianzIM US Equity Buffer20 Aug ETF (AUGW) is an ETF from AllianzIM and Vanguard Total International Stock ETF (VXUS) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year AUGW returned +8.94% while VXUS returned +20.82%. Year to date, AUGW is up 6.46% versus a gain of 13.64% for VXUS.
Over three years, AUGW compounded at +11.91% per year against +19.58% for VXUS.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VXUS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 12.0% compared with 5.6% for AUGW. 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 -8.8% for AUGW and -13.6% for VXUS. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.72. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AUGW charges 0.74% per year while VXUS charges 0.05%. On a $10,000 position that is $74 vs $5 annually, a gap of $69 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AUGW currently yields 0.00% against 2.51% for VXUS.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of AUGW and VXUS you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, AUGW or VXUS?
AUGW has an expense ratio of 0.74% while VXUS charges 0.05%. VXUS is the cheaper option, by $69 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, AUGW or VXUS?
Over the past year AUGW returned +8.94% vs +20.82% for VXUS, so VXUS leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, AUGW or VXUS?
VXUS has been the more volatile fund at 12.0% annualized versus 5.6% for AUGW. Worst drawdown: AUGW -8.8% vs VXUS -13.6%.
Should I hold both AUGW and VXUS?
AUGW and VXUS have a monthly-return correlation of 0.72, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, AUGW or VXUS?
AUGW yields 0.00% while VXUS yields 2.51%, so VXUS currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VXUS better than AUGW?
VXUS has a lower expense ratio. VXUS led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.