BSV vs VONG
Vanguard Short-Term Bond ETF vs Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF
Quick Verdict
BSV has a lower expense ratio. VONG delivered stronger 1-year returns. BSV offers more diversification with 2787 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BSV | VONG | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.06% | |
| AUM | $44.8B | $44.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 3.98% | 0.54% | |
| Holdings | 3,125 | 390 | |
| YTD Return | +0.30% | +5.03% | |
| 1Y Return | +2.30% | +11.57% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +4.43% | +22.20% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +1.57% | +12.72% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 2.4% | 15.9% | |
| Max Drawdown | -9.0% | -32.7% | |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Apr 3, 2007 | Sep 20, 2010 |
BSV vs VONG Performance
Vanguard Short-Term Bond ETF (BSV) is a ETF from Vanguard (US) and Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF (VONG) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year BSV returned +2.30% while VONG returned +11.57%. Year to date, BSV is up 0.30% versus a gain of 5.03% for VONG.
Over three years, BSV compounded at +4.43% per year against +22.20% for VONG; over five years the annualized figures are +1.57% and +12.72% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, VONG has the edge at +15.73% annualized vs +0.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VONG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.9% compared with 2.4% for BSV. 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 -9.0% for BSV and -32.7% for VONG. 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 0.23. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BSV charges 0.03% per year while VONG charges 0.06%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $6 annually, a gap of $3 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BSV currently yields 3.98% against 0.54% for VONG.
Holdings Overlap
BSV and VONG share 1 holdings out of 3172 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in BSV | Weight in VONG | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMC | 0.03% | 0.03% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BSV or VONG?
BSV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while VONG charges 0.06%. BSV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $3 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BSV or VONG?
Over the past year BSV returned +2.30% vs +11.57% for VONG, so VONG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), BSV annualized +0.91% vs +15.73% for VONG. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BSV or VONG?
VONG has been the more volatile fund at 15.9% annualized versus 2.4% for BSV. Worst drawdown: BSV -9.0% vs VONG -32.7%.
Should I hold both BSV and VONG?
BSV and VONG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.23, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BSV and VONG?
BSV and VONG share 1 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 3172 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BSV or VONG?
BSV yields 3.98% while VONG yields 0.54%, so BSV 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.