BWZ vs VOO
State Street SPDR Bloomberg Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF vs Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
VOO has a lower expense ratio. VOO delivered stronger 1-year returns. VOO offers more diversification with 509 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BWZ | VOO | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.35% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $287M | $997.4B | |
| Dividend Yield | 2.09% | 1.08% | |
| Holdings | 286 | 509 | |
| YTD Return | +1.46% | +12.25% | |
| 1Y Return | +1.17% | +20.92% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +3.32% | +21.79% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -1.01% | +13.05% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 7.4% | 14.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -37.9% | -34.3% | |
| Fund Family | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Jan 15, 2009 | Sep 7, 2010 |
BWZ vs VOO Performance
State Street SPDR Bloomberg Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF (BWZ) is a ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year BWZ returned +1.17% while VOO returned +20.92%. Year to date, BWZ is up 1.46% versus a gain of 12.25% for VOO.
Over three years, BWZ compounded at +3.32% per year against +21.79% for VOO; over five years the annualized figures are -1.01% and +13.05% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, VOO has the edge at +13.45% annualized vs -0.60%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VOO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.1% compared with 7.4% for BWZ. 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 -37.9% for BWZ and -34.3% for VOO. 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 0.43. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BWZ charges 0.35% per year while VOO charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $35 vs $3 annually, a gap of $32 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BWZ currently yields 2.09% against 1.08% for VOO.
Holdings Overlap
BWZ and VOO share 0 holdings out of 507 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, BWZ or VOO?
BWZ has an expense ratio of 0.35% while VOO charges 0.03%. VOO is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $32 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BWZ or VOO?
Over the past year BWZ returned +1.17% vs +20.92% for VOO, so VOO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), BWZ annualized -0.60% vs +13.45% for VOO. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BWZ or VOO?
VOO has been the more volatile fund at 14.1% annualized versus 7.4% for BWZ. Worst drawdown: BWZ -37.9% vs VOO -34.3%.
Should I hold both BWZ and VOO?
BWZ and VOO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.43, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BWZ and VOO?
BWZ and VOO share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 507 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BWZ or VOO?
BWZ yields 2.09% while VOO yields 1.08%, so BWZ 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.