BETZ vs VTI
Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 3,543 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BETZ | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.75% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $50M | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 5.01% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 27 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | -6.43% | +13.14% | |
| 1Y Return | -18.14% | +20.29% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +5.89% | +21.42% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -7.68% | +12.00% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 28.7% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -60.8% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | Roundhill Investments | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Dec 31, 2023 | May 24, 2001 |
BETZ vs VTI Performance
Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming ETF (BETZ) is a ETF from Roundhill Investments and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year BETZ returned -18.14% while VTI returned +20.29%. Year to date, BETZ is down 6.43% versus a gain of 13.14% for VTI.
Over three years, BETZ compounded at +5.89% per year against +21.42% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are -7.68% and +12.00% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.08% annualized vs +4.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BETZ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 28.7% 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 -60.8% for BETZ 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 0.71. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BETZ charges 0.75% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $75 vs $3 annually, a gap of $72 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BETZ currently yields 5.01% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
BETZ and VTI share 4 holdings out of 2807 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, BETZ or VTI?
BETZ has an expense ratio of 0.75% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $72 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BETZ or VTI?
Over the past year BETZ returned -18.14% vs +20.29% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), BETZ annualized +4.03% vs +8.08% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BETZ or VTI?
BETZ has been the more volatile fund at 28.7% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: BETZ -60.8% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both BETZ and VTI?
BETZ and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.71, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BETZ and VTI?
BETZ and VTI share 4 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2807 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BETZ or VTI?
BETZ yields 5.01% while VTI yields 1.07%, so BETZ 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.