AWF vs VTI
AllianceBernstein Global High Income Fund vs Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 2783 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | AWF | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.00% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $969M | $663.5B | |
| Dividend Yield | 6.92% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 1,273 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | -1.03% | +14.22% | |
| 1Y Return | -2.56% | +22.19% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +8.42% | +21.27% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +3.62% | +12.23% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.2% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -60.0% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | AllianceBernstein L.P. | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Jul 28, 1993 | May 24, 2001 |
AWF vs VTI Performance
AllianceBernstein Global High Income Fund (AWF) is a ETF from AllianceBernstein L.P. and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year AWF returned -2.56% while VTI returned +22.19%. Year to date, AWF is down 1.03% versus a gain of 14.22% for VTI.
Over three years, AWF compounded at +8.42% per year against +21.27% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +3.62% and +12.23% respectively. Across the full 25-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.14% annualized vs +0.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
AWF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.2% compared with 15.3% for VTI. 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 -60.0% for AWF and -56.6% for VTI. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.62. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AWF charges 1.00% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $100 vs $3 annually, a gap of $97 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AWF currently yields 6.92% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
AWF and VTI share 0 holdings out of 3490 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, AWF or VTI?
AWF has an expense ratio of 1.00% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $97 per year of difference.
Which performed better, AWF or VTI?
Over the past year AWF returned -2.56% vs +22.19% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (25 years), AWF annualized +0.91% vs +8.14% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, AWF or VTI?
AWF has been the more volatile fund at 18.2% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: AWF -60.0% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both AWF and VTI?
AWF and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.62, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between AWF and VTI?
AWF and VTI share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 3490 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, AWF or VTI?
AWF yields 6.92% while VTI yields 1.07%, so AWF currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.