BND vs XLV
Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF vs State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF
Quick Verdict
BND has a lower expense ratio. XLV delivered stronger 1-year returns. BND offers more diversification with 10790 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BND | XLV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.08% | |
| AUM | $159.8B | $42.1B | |
| Dividend Yield | 3.94% | 1.60% | |
| Holdings | 17,528 | 62 | |
| YTD Return | -0.53% | +8.96% | |
| 1Y Return | +1.89% | +31.20% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +4.22% | +9.11% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -0.29% | +6.69% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 4.6% | 14.2% | |
| Max Drawdown | -19.6% | -40.6% | |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Apr 3, 2007 | Dec 16, 1998 |
BND vs XLV Performance
Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND) is a ETF from Vanguard (US) and State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLV) is a ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors. Over the past year BND returned +1.89% while XLV returned +31.20%. Year to date, BND is down 0.53% versus a gain of 8.96% for XLV.
Over three years, BND compounded at +4.22% per year against +9.11% for XLV; over five years the annualized figures are -0.29% and +6.69% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, XLV has the edge at +7.48% annualized vs +0.67%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
XLV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.2% 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 -40.6% for XLV. 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 0.26. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BND charges 0.03% per year while XLV charges 0.08%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $8 annually, a gap of $5 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BND currently yields 3.94% against 1.60% for XLV.
Holdings Overlap
BND and XLV share 0 holdings out of 10850 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 XLV?
BND has an expense ratio of 0.03% while XLV charges 0.08%. BND is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $5 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BND or XLV?
Over the past year BND returned +1.89% vs +31.20% for XLV, so XLV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), BND annualized +0.67% vs +7.48% for XLV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BND or XLV?
XLV has been the more volatile fund at 14.2% annualized versus 4.6% for BND. Worst drawdown: BND -19.6% vs XLV -40.6%.
Should I hold both BND and XLV?
BND and XLV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.26, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BND and XLV?
BND and XLV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 10850 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BND or XLV?
BND yields 3.94% while XLV yields 1.60%, 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.