ECNS vs VTI
iShares MSCI China Small-Cap 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 | ECNS | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.59% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $64M | $663.5B | |
| Dividend Yield | 6.69% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 275 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | -10.42% | +13.87% | |
| 1Y Return | -12.62% | +23.31% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +6.54% | +21.17% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -6.98% | +12.23% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 25.2% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -64.9% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Sep 28, 2010 | May 24, 2001 |
ECNS vs VTI Performance
iShares MSCI China Small-Cap ETF (ECNS) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year ECNS returned -12.62% while VTI returned +23.31%. Year to date, ECNS is down 10.42% versus a gain of 13.87% for VTI.
Over three years, ECNS compounded at +6.54% per year against +21.17% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are -6.98% and +12.23% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.13% annualized vs -1.83%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ECNS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 25.2% 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 -64.9% for ECNS 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 0.41. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ECNS charges 0.59% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $59 vs $3 annually, a gap of $56 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ECNS currently yields 6.69% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
ECNS and VTI share 0 holdings out of 3050 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, ECNS or VTI?
ECNS has an expense ratio of 0.59% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $56 per year of difference.
Which performed better, ECNS or VTI?
Over the past year ECNS returned -12.62% vs +23.31% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), ECNS annualized -1.83% vs +8.13% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, ECNS or VTI?
ECNS has been the more volatile fund at 25.2% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: ECNS -64.9% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both ECNS and VTI?
ECNS and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.41, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between ECNS and VTI?
ECNS and VTI share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 3050 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, ECNS or VTI?
ECNS yields 6.69% while VTI yields 1.07%, so ECNS 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.