FLC vs VTI
Flaherty & Crumrine Total Return Fund vs Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 2783 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FLC | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.64% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $193M | $663.5B | |
| Dividend Yield | 6.71% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 257 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | -0.09% | +13.87% | |
| 1Y Return | +5.70% | +23.31% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +12.96% | +21.17% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -0.01% | +12.23% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.3% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -83.0% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | Flaherty & Crumrine | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Allocation/Balanced | Equity | |
| Inception | Aug 29, 2003 | May 24, 2001 |
FLC vs VTI Performance
Flaherty & Crumrine Total Return Fund (FLC) is a ETF from Flaherty & Crumrine and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year FLC returned +5.70% while VTI returned +23.31%. Year to date, FLC is down 0.09% versus a gain of 13.87% for VTI.
Over three years, FLC compounded at +12.96% per year against +21.17% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are -0.01% and +12.23% respectively. Across the full 23-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.13% annualized vs -0.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FLC has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.3% 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 -83.0% for FLC 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 0.44. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FLC charges 1.64% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $164 vs $3 annually, a gap of $161 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FLC currently yields 6.71% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
FLC and VTI share 23 holdings out of 2944 unique holdings combined, representing a 1.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FLC or VTI?
FLC has an expense ratio of 1.64% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $161 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FLC or VTI?
Over the past year FLC returned +5.70% vs +23.31% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (23 years), FLC annualized -0.02% vs +8.13% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FLC or VTI?
FLC has been the more volatile fund at 19.3% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: FLC -83.0% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both FLC and VTI?
FLC and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.44, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between FLC and VTI?
FLC and VTI share 23 common holdings with a 1.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2944 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FLC or VTI?
FLC yields 6.71% while VTI yields 1.07%, so FLC 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.