BMVP vs VTI
Invesco Bloomberg MVP Multi-factor 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 | BMVP | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.29% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $106M | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.71% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 58 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +11.52% | +12.65% | |
| 1Y Return | +12.41% | +21.39% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +14.74% | +21.54% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.69% | +12.11% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.6% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -53.4% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 1, 2003 | May 24, 2001 |
BMVP vs VTI Performance
Invesco Bloomberg MVP Multi-factor ETF (BMVP) is a ETF from Invesco (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year BMVP returned +12.41% while VTI returned +21.39%. Year to date, BMVP is up 11.52% versus a gain of 12.65% for VTI.
Over three years, BMVP compounded at +14.74% per year against +21.54% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +7.69% and +12.11% respectively. Across the full 23-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.07% annualized vs +7.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BMVP has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.6% 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 -53.4% for BMVP 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 0.93. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BMVP charges 0.29% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $29 vs $3 annually, a gap of $26 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BMVP currently yields 1.71% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
BMVP and VTI share 51 holdings out of 2792 unique holdings combined, representing a 9.8% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BMVP or VTI?
BMVP has an expense ratio of 0.29% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $26 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BMVP or VTI?
Over the past year BMVP returned +12.41% vs +21.39% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (23 years), BMVP annualized +7.62% vs +8.07% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BMVP or VTI?
BMVP has been the more volatile fund at 15.6% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: BMVP -53.4% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both BMVP and VTI?
BMVP and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.93, 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 BMVP and VTI?
BMVP and VTI share 51 common holdings with a 9.8% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2792 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BMVP or VTI?
BMVP yields 1.71% while VTI yields 1.07%, so BMVP 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.