BNDX vs XLF
Vanguard Total International Bond ETF vs State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF
Quick Verdict
BNDX has a lower expense ratio. XLF delivered stronger 1-year returns. BNDX offers more diversification with 1269 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BNDX | XLF | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.07% | 0.08% | |
| AUM | $83.0B | $56.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 4.45% | 1.51% | |
| Holdings | 13,626 | 80 | |
| YTD Return | +0.35% | +6.14% | |
| 1Y Return | +1.09% | +13.25% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +4.19% | +20.31% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -0.06% | +10.19% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 4.1% | 21.4% | |
| Max Drawdown | -17.2% | -83.8% | |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | May 31, 2013 | Dec 16, 1998 |
BNDX vs XLF Performance
Vanguard Total International Bond ETF (BNDX) is a ETF from Vanguard (US) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) is a ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors. Over the past year BNDX returned +1.09% while XLF returned +13.25%. Year to date, BNDX is up 0.35% versus a gain of 6.14% for XLF.
Over three years, BNDX compounded at +4.19% per year against +20.31% for XLF; over five years the annualized figures are -0.06% and +10.19% respectively. Across the full 13-year window we track, XLF has the edge at +3.70% annualized vs +1.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
XLF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 21.4% compared with 4.1% for BNDX. 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 -17.2% for BNDX and -83.8% for XLF. 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 0.21. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BNDX charges 0.07% per year while XLF charges 0.08%. On a $10,000 position that is $7 vs $8 annually, a gap of $1 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BNDX currently yields 4.45% against 1.51% for XLF.
Holdings Overlap
BNDX and XLF share 0 holdings out of 1346 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, BNDX or XLF?
BNDX has an expense ratio of 0.07% while XLF charges 0.08%. BNDX is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $1 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BNDX or XLF?
Over the past year BNDX returned +1.09% vs +13.25% for XLF, so XLF leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (13 years), BNDX annualized +1.08% vs +3.70% for XLF. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BNDX or XLF?
XLF has been the more volatile fund at 21.4% annualized versus 4.1% for BNDX. Worst drawdown: BNDX -17.2% vs XLF -83.8%.
Should I hold both BNDX and XLF?
BNDX and XLF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.21, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BNDX and XLF?
BNDX and XLF share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 1346 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BNDX or XLF?
BNDX yields 4.45% while XLF yields 1.51%, so BNDX 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.