FLV vs VTI
American Century Focused Large Cap Value ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, FLV or VTI?
Large Cap Value against Large Cap Blend.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. FLV is less concentrated, with 32.6% 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 | FLV | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.42% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $380M | $666.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.49% | 1.03% |
| Holdings | 56 | 3,543 |
| YTD Return | +10.93% | +13.10%Best |
| 1Y Return | +15.76% | +17.01%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.18% | +22.26%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.69% | +11.98%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.4%Best | 15.6% |
| Max Drawdown | -15.1%Best | -25.4% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $15,879 | $17,608Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 32.6%Best | 33.3% |
| Fund Family | American Century ETFs | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Mar 31, 2020 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Apr 2, 2020 to Sep 24, 2026 (6.5 years).
FLV 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 6.5 years both funds cover.
FLV vs VTI Performance
American Century Focused Large Cap Value ETF (FLV) is an ETF from American Century ETFs and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year FLV returned +15.76% while VTI returned +17.01%. Year to date, FLV is up 10.93% versus a gain of 13.10% for VTI.
Over three years, FLV compounded at +15.18% per year against +22.26% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +9.69% and +11.98% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +19.96% annualized vs +14.91%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.6% compared with 13.4% for FLV. 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 -15.1% for FLV and -25.4% 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 0.75. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FLV charges 0.42% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $42 vs $3 annually, a gap of $39 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FLV currently yields 1.49% against 1.03% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
92.9% of FLV's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 26.5% of VTI's money is in holdings FLV also owns.
Most of FLV is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
47 positions in common, counted across the 52 positions we hold weights for in FLV and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 56 and 3,543.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,104 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for FLV (71.0% of the fund), and 0 for FLV that do not appear in VTI (0.0%).
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 FLV | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple, Inc | 2.58% | 6.29% | 3.71% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 3.46% | 4.79% | 1.33% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.07% | 3.65% | 0.58% |
| BRK.BBerkshire Hathaway Inc Brk/B Us Equity | 3.46% | 1.28% | 2.18% |
| JPMJpmorgan Chase | 3.25% | 1.31% | 1.94% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 1.33% | 2.90% | 1.57% |
| MMCMarsh & Mclennan Cos Inc Common Stock Usd 1 | 4.04% | 0.13% | 3.91% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 3.28% | 0.86% | 2.42% |
| DUKDuke Energy Corp | 3.54% | 0.14% | 3.40% |
| BDXBecton Dickinson And Co. | 3.20% | 0.06% | 3.14% |
92.9% of FLV 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, FLV or VTI?
FLV has an expense ratio of 0.42% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $39 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FLV or VTI?
Over the past year FLV returned +15.76% vs +17.01% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), FLV annualized +14.91% vs +19.96% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FLV or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.6% annualized versus 13.4% for FLV. Worst drawdown: FLV -15.1% vs VTI -25.4%.
Should I hold both FLV and VTI?
FLV and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.75, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between FLV and VTI?
92.9% of FLV's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 26.5% of VTI's is in holdings FLV also owns. They hold 47 positions in common, counted across the 52 positions we hold weights for in FLV and 3,463 in VTI.
Which pays a higher dividend, FLV or VTI?
FLV yields 1.49% while VTI yields 1.03%, so FLV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than FLV?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. FLV is less concentrated, with 32.6% 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.