BND vs SPDW
Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF vs State Street SPDR Portfolio Developed World ex-US ETF
Quick Verdict
SPDW delivered stronger 1-year returns. BND offers more diversification with 10790 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BND | SPDW | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $159.8B | $40.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 3.94% | 3.02% | |
| Holdings | 17,528 | 2,440 | |
| YTD Return | -0.61% | +15.97% | |
| 1Y Return | +1.81% | +29.29% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +4.14% | +19.55% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -0.29% | +9.71% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 4.6% | 17.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -19.6% | -62.2% | |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Apr 3, 2007 | Apr 20, 2007 |
BND vs SPDW Performance
Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND) is a ETF from Vanguard (US) and State Street SPDR Portfolio Developed World ex-US ETF (SPDW) is a ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors. Over the past year BND returned +1.81% while SPDW returned +29.29%. Year to date, BND is down 0.61% versus a gain of 15.97% for SPDW.
Over three years, BND compounded at +4.14% per year against +19.55% for SPDW; over five years the annualized figures are -0.29% and +9.71% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, SPDW has the edge at +3.14% annualized vs +0.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SPDW has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.6% compared with 4.6% for BND. 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 -19.6% for BND and -62.2% for SPDW. 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 0.30. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BND charges 0.03% per year while SPDW charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $3 annually. On income, BND currently yields 3.94% against 3.02% for SPDW.
Holdings Overlap
BND and SPDW share 0 holdings out of 13138 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, BND or SPDW?
BND has an expense ratio of 0.03% while SPDW charges 0.03%. They cost the same. On a $10,000 investment, that is $0 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BND or SPDW?
Over the past year BND returned +1.81% vs +29.29% for SPDW, so SPDW leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), BND annualized +0.67% vs +3.14% for SPDW. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BND or SPDW?
SPDW has been the more volatile fund at 17.6% annualized versus 4.6% for BND. Worst drawdown: BND -19.6% vs SPDW -62.2%.
Should I hold both BND and SPDW?
BND and SPDW have a monthly-return correlation of 0.30, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BND and SPDW?
BND and SPDW share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 13138 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BND or SPDW?
BND yields 3.94% while SPDW yields 3.02%, so BND 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.