CFO vs VTI
VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, CFO or VTI?
VTI has been ahead.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. CFO is less concentrated, with 3.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.3%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CFO | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.35% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $416M | $666.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.20% | 1.03% |
| Holdings | 502 | 3,543 |
| YTD Return | +8.69% | +12.08%Best |
| 1Y Return | +10.61% | +16.31%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +11.14% | +20.83%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +3.82% | +11.89%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.3%Best | 15.2% |
| Max Drawdown | -24.4%Best | -35.0% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $12,062 | $17,537Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 3.7%Best | 33.3% |
| Fund Family | Victory Capital Management Inc. | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jul 1, 2014 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 2, 2014 to Sep 14, 2026 (12.2 years).
CFO vs VTI growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 12.2 years both funds cover.
CFO vs VTI Performance
VictoryShares US 500 Enhanced Volatility Weighted ETF (CFO) is an ETF from Victory Capital Management Inc. and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year CFO returned +10.61% while VTI returned +16.31%. Year to date, CFO is up 8.69% versus a gain of 12.08% for VTI.
Over three years, CFO compounded at +11.14% per year against +20.83% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +3.82% and +11.89% respectively. Across the full 12-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +11.91% annualized vs +7.94%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.2% compared with 12.3% for CFO. 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 -24.4% for CFO and -35.0% for VTI. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.86. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CFO charges 0.35% per year while VTI 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, CFO currently yields 1.20% against 1.03% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
98.8% of CFO's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 84.0% of VTI's money is in holdings CFO also owns.
Most of CFO is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
495 positions in common, counted across the 501 positions we hold weights for in CFO and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 502 and 3,543.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 662 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for CFO (13.8% of the fund), and 4 for CFO that do not appear in VTI (0.8%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in CFO | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 0.20% | 6.40% | 6.20% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 0.30% | 6.29% | 5.99% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 0.30% | 4.79% | 4.49% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 0.22% | 3.65% | 3.43% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 0.22% | 2.90% | 2.68% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 0.15% | 2.56% | 2.41% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 0.15% | 1.70% | 1.55% |
| BRK.BBerkshire Hathaway Inc Brk/B Us Equity | 0.40% | 1.28% | 0.88% |
| JPMJpmorgan Chase | 0.30% | 1.31% | 1.01% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 0.16% | 1.35% | 1.19% |
98.8% of CFO is already inside VTI.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CFO or VTI?
CFO has an expense ratio of 0.35% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $32 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CFO or VTI?
Over the past year CFO returned +10.61% vs +16.31% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (12 years), CFO annualized +7.94% vs +11.91% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CFO or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.2% annualized versus 12.3% for CFO. Worst drawdown: CFO -24.4% vs VTI -35.0%.
Should I hold both CFO and VTI?
CFO and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.86, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between CFO and VTI?
98.8% of CFO's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 84.0% of VTI's is in holdings CFO also owns. They hold 495 positions in common, counted across the 501 positions we hold weights for in CFO and 3,463 in VTI.
Which pays a higher dividend, CFO or VTI?
CFO yields 1.20% while VTI yields 1.03%, so CFO currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than CFO?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. CFO is less concentrated, with 3.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.