CHIP vs VTI

CHIP vs VTI

Which is better, CHIP or VTI?

Large Cap Growth against Large Cap Blend.

VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI is less concentrated, with 34.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 50.1%.

Lower Fees: VTILess Concentrated: VTI

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

MetricCHIPVTI
Expense Ratio0.65%0.03%Best
AUM$1M$689.2B
Dividend Yield0.00%1.06%
Holdings1143,542
YTD Return-28.55%+8.54%Best
1Y Return-+11.14%
3Y Return (annualized)-+20.29%
5Y Return (annualized)-+9.84%
Top 10 Weight50.1%34.6%Best
Fund FamilyREX SharesVanguard (US)
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap GrowthLarge Cap Blend
InceptionSep 23, 2026May 24, 2001

Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.

CHIP 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.

CHIP vs VTI Performance

REX AI Chipmaking ETF (CHIP) is an ETF from REX Shares and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Year to date, CHIP is down 28.55% versus a gain of 8.54% for VTI.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Fees and Cost Over Time

CHIP charges 0.65% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $65 vs $3 annually, a gap of $62 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CHIP currently yields 0.00% against 1.06% for VTI.

Holdings Overlap

CHIP already in VTI33.6%
VTI already in CHIP1.7%

33.6% of CHIP's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 1.7% of VTI's money is in holdings CHIP also owns.

The two portfolios partly overlap.

18 positions in common, counted across the 55 positions we hold weights for in CHIP and 3,464 in VTI, against full books of 114 and 3,542.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 1,117 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for CHIP (95.2% of the fund), and 5 for CHIP that do not appear in VTI (5.6%).

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

StockWeight in CHIPWeight in VTIDifference
AMATApplied Material5.01%0.55%4.46%
KLACKla Corp.5.16%0.35%4.81%
LRCXLam Research Corporation4.92%0.56%4.36%
TERTeradyne Inc4.89%0.09%4.80%
ENTGEntegris Inc Common Stock Usd 0.013.31%0.03%3.28%
MKSIMks Instruments Inc2.18%0.02%2.16%
AMKRAmkor Technology, Inc.1.93%0.01%1.92%
ONTOOnto Innovation Inc1.60%0.02%1.58%
FORMFormfactor, Inc.1.28%0.02%1.26%
AXTIAxt Inc Com0.54%0.01%0.53%

33.6% of CHIP 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.

CHIPVTI

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, CHIP or VTI?

CHIP has an expense ratio of 0.65% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $62 a year on a $10,000 investment.

What is the holdings overlap between CHIP and VTI?

33.6% of CHIP's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 1.7% of VTI's is in holdings CHIP also owns. They hold 18 positions in common, counted across the 55 positions we hold weights for in CHIP and 3,464 in VTI.

Which pays a higher dividend, CHIP or VTI?

CHIP yields 0.00% while VTI yields 1.06%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is VTI better than CHIP?

VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI is less concentrated, with 34.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 50.1%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.