BSV vs VWO
Vanguard Short-Term Bond ETF vs Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF
Quick Verdict
BSV has a lower expense ratio. VWO delivered stronger 1-year returns. VWO offers more diversification with 3982 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BSV | VWO | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.06% | |
| AUM | $44.8B | $122.3B | |
| Dividend Yield | 3.98% | 2.37% | |
| Holdings | 3,125 | 6,334 | |
| YTD Return | +0.42% | +10.11% | |
| 1Y Return | +2.36% | +21.05% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +4.47% | +17.66% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +1.60% | +6.52% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 2.4% | 20.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -9.0% | -68.3% | |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Apr 3, 2007 | Mar 4, 2005 |
BSV vs VWO Performance
Vanguard Short-Term Bond ETF (BSV) is a ETF from Vanguard (US) and Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF (VWO) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year BSV returned +2.36% while VWO returned +21.05%. Year to date, BSV is up 0.42% versus a gain of 10.11% for VWO.
Over three years, BSV compounded at +4.47% per year against +17.66% for VWO; over five years the annualized figures are +1.60% and +6.52% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, VWO has the edge at +4.98% annualized vs +0.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VWO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.1% 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 -68.3% for VWO. 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 0.20. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BSV charges 0.03% per year while VWO 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 2.37% for VWO.
Holdings Overlap
BSV and VWO share 1 holdings out of 6768 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 VWO | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| LOGG3:BV | 0.01% | 0.01% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BSV or VWO?
BSV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while VWO 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 VWO?
Over the past year BSV returned +2.36% vs +21.05% for VWO, so VWO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), BSV annualized +0.91% vs +4.98% for VWO. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BSV or VWO?
VWO has been the more volatile fund at 20.1% annualized versus 2.4% for BSV. Worst drawdown: BSV -9.0% vs VWO -68.3%.
Should I hold both BSV and VWO?
BSV and VWO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.20, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BSV and VWO?
BSV and VWO share 1 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 6768 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BSV or VWO?
BSV yields 3.98% while VWO yields 2.37%, 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.