EEMA vs VTI
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, EEMA or VTI?
Each has led over a different period.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. EEMA led over 1Y and 3Y, VTI over 5Y and the full window. VTI is less concentrated, with 33.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.3%.
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 | EEMA | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.49% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $874M | $666.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.32% | 1.03% |
| Holdings | 897 | 3,543 |
| YTD Return | +24.49%Best | +14.05% |
| 1Y Return | +32.91%Best | +16.93% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +25.84%Best | +22.65% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.99% | +12.46%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.1% | 14.4%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -44.3% | -35.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $15,379 | $17,988Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 38.3% | 33.3%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Feb 8, 2012 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 9, 2012 to Sep 22, 2026 (14.6 years).
EEMA 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 14.6 years both funds cover.
EEMA vs VTI Performance
iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Asia ETF (EEMA) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year EEMA returned +32.91% while VTI returned +16.93%. Year to date, EEMA is up 24.49% versus a gain of 14.05% for VTI.
Over three years, EEMA compounded at +25.84% per year against +22.65% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +8.99% and +12.46% respectively. Across the full 15-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +12.90% annualized vs +6.17%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
EEMA has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.1% compared with 14.4% 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 -44.3% for EEMA 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 0.65. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
EEMA charges 0.49% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $49 vs $3 annually, a gap of $46 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EEMA currently yields 1.32% against 1.03% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
0.1% of EEMA's money is in holdings VTI also owns.
We cannot see either book well enough to say how much of this pair is duplicated.
1 positions in common, counted across the 851 positions we hold weights for in EEMA and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 897 and 3,543.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,149 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for EEMA (97.4% of the fund), and 6 for EEMA that do not appear in VTI (7.0%).
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 EEMA | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| HALHalliburton Co. | 0.09% | 0.03% | 0.06% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of EEMA and VTI you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, EEMA or VTI?
EEMA has an expense ratio of 0.49% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $46 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, EEMA or VTI?
Over the past year EEMA returned +32.91% vs +16.93% for VTI, so EEMA leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (15 years), EEMA annualized +6.17% vs +12.90% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, EEMA or VTI?
EEMA has been the more volatile fund at 17.1% annualized versus 14.4% for VTI. Worst drawdown: EEMA -44.3% vs VTI -35.0%.
Should I hold both EEMA and VTI?
EEMA and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.65, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, EEMA or VTI?
EEMA yields 1.32% while VTI yields 1.03%, so EEMA currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than EEMA?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. EEMA led over 1Y and 3Y, VTI over 5Y and the full window. VTI is less concentrated, with 33.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.