FSGS vs VTI
First Trust SMID Growth Strength 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 | FSGS | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.61% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $32M | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.03% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 101 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +11.34% | +13.14% | |
| 1Y Return | +9.96% | +22.35% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +10.00% | +21.83% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +5.19% | +12.01% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 20.8% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -45.0% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Jun 20, 2017 | May 24, 2001 |
FSGS vs VTI Performance
First Trust SMID Growth Strength ETF (FSGS) is a ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year FSGS returned +9.96% while VTI returned +22.35%. Year to date, FSGS is up 11.34% versus a gain of 13.14% for VTI.
Over three years, FSGS compounded at +10.00% per year against +21.83% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +5.19% and +12.01% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.09% annualized vs +7.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FSGS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.8% 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 -45.0% for FSGS 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 0.87. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FSGS charges 0.61% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $61 vs $3 annually, a gap of $58 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FSGS currently yields 0.03% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
FSGS and VTI share 79 holdings out of 2808 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, FSGS or VTI?
FSGS has an expense ratio of 0.61% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $58 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FSGS or VTI?
Over the past year FSGS returned +9.96% vs +22.35% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), FSGS annualized +7.11% vs +8.09% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FSGS or VTI?
FSGS has been the more volatile fund at 20.8% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: FSGS -45.0% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both FSGS and VTI?
FSGS and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.87, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between FSGS and VTI?
FSGS and VTI share 79 common holdings with a 1.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2808 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FSGS or VTI?
FSGS yields 0.03% 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.