EQL vs VTI
ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, EQL or VTI?
Nearly the same fund. VTI costs less.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. EQL is less concentrated, with 23.2% 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 | EQL | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.19% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $761M | $666.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.34% | 1.03% |
| Holdings | 12 | 3,543 |
| YTD Return | +8.41% | +12.25%Best |
| 1Y Return | +10.83% | +15.74%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +16.81% | +22.45%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +10.38% | +12.32%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.6%Best | 14.8% |
| Max Drawdown | -36.4% | -35.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $16,385 | $17,877Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 23.2%Best | 33.3% |
| Fund Family | ALPS Advisors | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jul 6, 2009 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 7, 2009 to Sep 29, 2026 (17.2 years).
EQL 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 17.2 years both funds cover.
EQL vs VTI Performance
ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL) is an ETF from ALPS Advisors and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year EQL returned +10.83% while VTI returned +15.74%. Year to date, EQL is up 8.41% versus a gain of 12.25% for VTI.
Over three years, EQL compounded at +16.81% per year against +22.45% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +10.38% and +12.32% respectively. Across the full 17-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +13.72% annualized vs +11.77%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.8% compared with 13.6% for EQL. 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 -36.4% for EQL 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 0.97. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
EQL charges 0.19% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $19 vs $3 annually, a gap of $16 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EQL currently yields 1.34% against 1.03% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
98.1% of EQL's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 85.7% of VTI's money is in holdings EQL also owns.
Most of EQL is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
482 positions in common, counted across the 494 positions we hold weights for in EQL and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 12 and 3,543.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 672 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for EQL (11.9% of the fund), and 6 for EQL that do not appear in VTI (0.7%).
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 EQL | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 1.90% | 6.40% | 4.50% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 1.72% | 6.29% | 4.57% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 4.89% | 2.90% | 1.99% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.67% | 3.65% | 0.02% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 1.38% | 4.79% | 3.41% |
| XOMExxonmobil Holdings Corp Common Stock Usd | 2.80% | 0.89% | 1.91% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 1.67% | 1.70% | 0.03% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 0.64% | 2.56% | 1.92% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 1.51% | 1.35% | 0.16% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 1.55% | 1.22% | 0.33% |
98.1% of EQL is already inside VTI.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, EQL or VTI?
EQL has an expense ratio of 0.19% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $16 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, EQL or VTI?
Over the past year EQL returned +10.83% vs +15.74% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (17 years), EQL annualized +11.77% vs +13.72% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, EQL or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 14.8% annualized versus 13.6% for EQL. Worst drawdown: EQL -36.4% vs VTI -35.0%.
Should I hold both EQL and VTI?
EQL and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.97, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between EQL and VTI?
98.1% of EQL's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 85.7% of VTI's is in holdings EQL also owns. They hold 482 positions in common, counted across the 494 positions we hold weights for in EQL and 3,463 in VTI.
Which pays a higher dividend, EQL or VTI?
EQL yields 1.34% while VTI yields 1.03%, so EQL currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than EQL?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. EQL is less concentrated, with 23.2% 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.