BSMT vs VTI
Invesco BulletShares 2029 Municipal Bond ETF vs Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 2783 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BSMT | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.18% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $281M | $663.5B | |
| Dividend Yield | 2.74% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 1,790 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +1.03% | +13.87% | |
| 1Y Return | +3.29% | +23.31% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +3.05% | +21.17% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -0.25% | +12.23% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 6.4% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -16.2% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Sep 25, 2019 | May 24, 2001 |
BSMT vs VTI Performance
Invesco BulletShares 2029 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMT) is a ETF from Invesco (US) and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year BSMT returned +3.29% while VTI returned +23.31%. Year to date, BSMT is up 1.03% versus a gain of 13.87% for VTI.
Over three years, BSMT compounded at +3.05% per year against +21.17% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are -0.25% and +12.23% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.13% annualized vs +0.59%. 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 6.4% for BSMT. 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 -16.2% for BSMT 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 0.58. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BSMT charges 0.18% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $18 vs $3 annually, a gap of $15 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BSMT currently yields 2.74% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
BSMT and VTI share 0 holdings out of 3292 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, BSMT or VTI?
BSMT has an expense ratio of 0.18% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $15 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BSMT or VTI?
Over the past year BSMT returned +3.29% vs +23.31% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), BSMT annualized +0.59% vs +8.13% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BSMT or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 6.4% for BSMT. Worst drawdown: BSMT -16.2% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both BSMT and VTI?
BSMT and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.58, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BSMT and VTI?
BSMT and VTI share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 3292 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BSMT or VTI?
BSMT yields 2.74% while VTI yields 1.07%, so BSMT 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.