BFOR vs VTI
Barron'S 400 ETF vs Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. BFOR delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 2783 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BFOR | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.65% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $233M | $663.5B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.68% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 401 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +17.36% | +13.87% | |
| 1Y Return | +26.19% | +23.31% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +19.03% | +21.17% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +10.94% | +12.23% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.6% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -42.2% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | ALPS ETF Trust | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Jun 3, 2013 | May 24, 2001 |
BFOR vs VTI Performance
Barron'S 400 ETF (BFOR) is a ETF from ALPS ETF Trust and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year BFOR returned +26.19% while VTI returned +23.31%. Year to date, BFOR is up 17.36% versus a gain of 13.87% for VTI.
Over three years, BFOR compounded at +19.03% per year against +21.17% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +10.94% and +12.23% respectively. Across the full 13-year window we track, BFOR has the edge at +11.32% annualized vs +8.13%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BFOR has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.6% 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 -42.2% for BFOR 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 0.92. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BFOR charges 0.65% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $65 vs $3 annually, a gap of $62 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BFOR currently yields 0.68% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
BFOR and VTI share 295 holdings out of 2871 unique holdings combined, representing a 16.5% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BFOR or VTI?
BFOR has an expense ratio of 0.65% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $62 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BFOR or VTI?
Over the past year BFOR returned +26.19% vs +23.31% for VTI, so BFOR leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (13 years), BFOR annualized +11.32% vs +8.13% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BFOR or VTI?
BFOR has been the more volatile fund at 17.6% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: BFOR -42.2% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both BFOR and VTI?
BFOR and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.92, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between BFOR and VTI?
BFOR and VTI share 295 common holdings with a 16.5% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2871 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BFOR or VTI?
BFOR yields 0.68% while VTI yields 1.07%, so VTI 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.