BMN vs VTI
BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust 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 | BMN | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 2.17% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $156M | $663.5B | |
| Dividend Yield | 4.32% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 170 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | -0.29% | +13.87% | |
| 1Y Return | +9.34% | +23.31% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +5.14% | +21.17% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.23% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 9.5% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -13.0% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | BlackRock, Inc. (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Oct 26, 2022 | May 24, 2001 |
BMN vs VTI Performance
BlackRock 2037 Municipal Target Term Trust (BMN) is a ETF from BlackRock, Inc. (US) and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year BMN returned +9.34% while VTI returned +23.31%. Year to date, BMN is down 0.29% versus a gain of 13.87% for VTI.
Over three years, BMN compounded at +5.14% per year against +21.17% for VTI. Across the full 4-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.13% annualized vs +4.55%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.3% compared with 9.5% for BMN. 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 -13.0% for BMN 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 0.56. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BMN charges 2.17% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $217 vs $3 annually, a gap of $214 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BMN currently yields 4.32% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
BMN and VTI share 0 holdings out of 2846 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, BMN or VTI?
BMN has an expense ratio of 2.17% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $214 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BMN or VTI?
Over the past year BMN returned +9.34% vs +23.31% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), BMN annualized +4.55% vs +8.13% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BMN or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 9.5% for BMN. Worst drawdown: BMN -13.0% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both BMN and VTI?
BMN and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.56, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BMN and VTI?
BMN and VTI share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2846 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BMN or VTI?
BMN yields 4.32% while VTI yields 1.07%, so BMN 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.