FFLG vs VTI
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF 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 | FFLG | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.38% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $590M | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.14% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 104 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +9.91% | +13.14% | |
| 1Y Return | +19.70% | +22.35% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +25.82% | +21.83% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.46% | +12.01% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 22.3% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -44.6% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | Fidelity Investments (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Feb 2, 2021 | May 24, 2001 |
FFLG vs VTI Performance
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF (FFLG) is a ETF from Fidelity Investments (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year FFLG returned +19.70% while VTI returned +22.35%. Year to date, FFLG is up 9.91% versus a gain of 13.14% for VTI.
Over three years, FFLG compounded at +25.82% per year against +21.83% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +9.46% and +12.01% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, FFLG has the edge at +9.46% annualized vs +8.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FFLG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 22.3% 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 -44.6% for FFLG 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 0.90. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FFLG charges 0.38% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $38 vs $3 annually, a gap of $35 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FFLG currently yields 0.14% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
FFLG and VTI share 86 holdings out of 2802 unique holdings combined, representing a 43.2% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FFLG or VTI?
FFLG has an expense ratio of 0.38% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $35 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FFLG or VTI?
Over the past year FFLG returned +19.70% vs +22.35% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), FFLG annualized +9.46% vs +8.09% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FFLG or VTI?
FFLG has been the more volatile fund at 22.3% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: FFLG -44.6% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both FFLG and VTI?
FFLG and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.90, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between FFLG and VTI?
FFLG and VTI share 86 common holdings with a 43.2% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2802 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FFLG or VTI?
FFLG yields 0.14% while VTI yields 1.07%, so VTI 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.