BRW vs VTI
Saba Capital Income & Opportunities Fund 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 | BRW | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.43% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $366M | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 13.86% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 1,064 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +1.25% | +13.67% | |
| 1Y Return | -10.39% | +22.17% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +8.75% | +21.93% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.87% | +12.51% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.0% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -75.3% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | Saba Capital | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | May 12, 1988 | May 24, 2001 |
BRW vs VTI Performance
Saba Capital Income & Opportunities Fund (BRW) is a ETF from Saba Capital and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year BRW returned -10.39% while VTI returned +22.17%. Year to date, BRW is up 1.25% versus a gain of 13.67% for VTI.
Over three years, BRW compounded at +8.75% per year against +21.93% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +6.87% and +12.51% respectively. Across the full 25-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.11% annualized vs -1.13%. 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 14.0% for BRW. 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 -75.3% for BRW 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 0.55. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BRW charges 1.43% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $143 vs $3 annually, a gap of $140 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BRW currently yields 13.86% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
BRW and VTI share 189 holdings out of 3130 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.1% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BRW or VTI?
BRW has an expense ratio of 1.43% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $140 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BRW or VTI?
Over the past year BRW returned -10.39% vs +22.17% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (25 years), BRW annualized -1.13% vs +8.11% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BRW or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 14.0% for BRW. Worst drawdown: BRW -75.3% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both BRW and VTI?
BRW and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.55, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BRW and VTI?
BRW and VTI share 189 common holdings with a 0.1% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 3130 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BRW or VTI?
BRW yields 13.86% while VTI yields 1.07%, so BRW 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.