EMGF vs VTI
iShares Emerging Markets Equity Factor ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, EMGF or VTI?
Each has led over a different period.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. EMGF led over 1Y and 3Y, VTI over 5Y and the full window. EMGF is less concentrated, with 31.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.3%.
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 | EMGF | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.26% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $1.9B | $690.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 2.00% | 1.03% |
| Holdings | 702 | 3,524 |
| YTD Return | +21.91%Best | +13.35% |
| 1Y Return | +28.47%Best | +15.92% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +26.04%Best | +23.41% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.18% | +12.83%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.8% | 15.5%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -40.2% | -35.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $16,988 | $18,286Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 31.8%Best | 33.3% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Dec 8, 2015 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 10, 2015 to Oct 2, 2026 (10.8 years).
EMGF 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 10.8 years both funds cover.
EMGF vs VTI Performance
iShares Emerging Markets Equity Factor ETF (EMGF) 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 EMGF returned +28.47% while VTI returned +15.92%. Year to date, EMGF is up 21.91% versus a gain of 13.35% for VTI.
Over three years, EMGF compounded at +26.04% per year against +23.41% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +11.18% and +12.83% respectively. Across the full 11-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +13.37% annualized vs +10.39%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
EMGF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.8% compared with 15.5% 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 -40.2% for EMGF 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 0.70. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
EMGF charges 0.26% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $26 vs $3 annually, a gap of $23 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EMGF currently yields 2.00% against 1.03% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
0.3% of EMGF's money is in holdings VTI also owns.
We cannot see either book well enough to say how much of this pair is duplicated.
3 positions in common, counted across the 669 positions we hold weights for in EMGF and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 702 and 3,524.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,148 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for EMGF (97.4% of the fund), and 9 for EMGF that do not appear in VTI (8.8%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of EMGF 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, EMGF or VTI?
EMGF has an expense ratio of 0.26% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $23 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, EMGF or VTI?
Over the past year EMGF returned +28.47% vs +15.92% for VTI, so EMGF leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (11 years), EMGF annualized +10.39% vs +13.37% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, EMGF or VTI?
EMGF has been the more volatile fund at 16.8% annualized versus 15.5% for VTI. Worst drawdown: EMGF -40.2% vs VTI -35.0%.
Should I hold both EMGF and VTI?
EMGF and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.70, 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, EMGF or VTI?
EMGF yields 2.00% while VTI yields 1.03%, so EMGF currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than EMGF?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. EMGF led over 1Y and 3Y, VTI over 5Y and the full window. EMGF is less concentrated, with 31.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.