EFR vs VTI
Eaton Vance Senior Floating-Rate Trust vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 3,543 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | EFR | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 5.17% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $374M | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 7.72% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 511 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +1.98% | +14.82% | |
| 1Y Return | -0.30% | +22.43% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +5.86% | +21.93% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +3.42% | +12.34% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.0% | 15.4% | |
| Max Drawdown | -66.8% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | Eaton Vance | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Nov 24, 2003 | May 24, 2001 |
EFR vs VTI Performance
Eaton Vance Senior Floating-Rate Trust (EFR) is a ETF from Eaton Vance and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year EFR returned -0.30% while VTI returned +22.43%. Year to date, EFR is up 1.98% versus a gain of 14.82% for VTI.
Over three years, EFR compounded at +5.86% per year against +21.93% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +3.42% and +12.34% respectively. Across the full 23-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.16% annualized vs -0.57%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.4% compared with 15.0% for EFR. 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 -66.8% for EFR 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 0.56. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
EFR charges 5.17% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $517 vs $3 annually, a gap of $514 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EFR currently yields 7.72% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
EFR and VTI share 1 holdings out of 2966 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in EFR | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| SKIL | 0.01% | 0.00% | 0.01% |
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, EFR or VTI?
EFR has an expense ratio of 5.17% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $514 per year of difference.
Which performed better, EFR or VTI?
Over the past year EFR returned -0.30% vs +22.43% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (23 years), EFR annualized -0.57% vs +8.16% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, EFR or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.4% annualized versus 15.0% for EFR. Worst drawdown: EFR -66.8% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both EFR and VTI?
EFR and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.56, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between EFR and VTI?
EFR and VTI share 1 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2966 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, EFR or VTI?
EFR yields 7.72% while VTI yields 1.07%, so EFR 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.