CSF vs VTI
VictoryShares US Discovery Enhanced Volatility Wtd ETF vs Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 2783 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CSF | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.41% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $26M | $663.5B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.51% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | -6.58% | +14.16% | |
| 1Y Return | +4.25% | +23.62% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | -2.15% | +21.43% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +10.06% | +12.33% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.1% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -35.9% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | Victory Capital Management Inc. | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Jul 31, 2014 | May 24, 2001 |
CSF vs VTI Performance
VictoryShares US Discovery Enhanced Volatility Wtd ETF (CSF) is a ETF from Victory Capital Management Inc. and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year CSF returned +4.25% while VTI returned +23.62%. Year to date, CSF is down 6.58% versus a gain of 14.16% for VTI.
Over three years, CSF compounded at -2.15% per year against +21.43% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +10.06% and +12.33% respectively. Across the full 11-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.14% annualized vs +5.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
CSF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.1% compared with 15.3% for VTI. 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 -35.9% for CSF and -56.6% for VTI. 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 0.69. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CSF charges 0.41% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $41 vs $3 annually, a gap of $38 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CSF currently yields 1.51% against 1.07% for VTI.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CSF or VTI?
CSF has an expense ratio of 0.41% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $38 per year of difference.
Which performed better, CSF or VTI?
Over the past year CSF returned +4.25% vs +23.62% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (11 years), CSF annualized +5.02% vs +8.14% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, CSF or VTI?
CSF has been the more volatile fund at 16.1% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: CSF -35.9% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both CSF and VTI?
CSF and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.69, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
Which pays a higher dividend, CSF or VTI?
CSF yields 1.51% while VTI yields 1.07%, so CSF 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.