GBXA vs VTI
Goldman Sachs US Large Cap Buffer 1 ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, GBXA or VTI?
Nearly the same fund. VTI costs less.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97.
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 | GBXA | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.50% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $7M | $690.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.34% | 1.03% |
| Holdings | 6 | 3,524 |
| Volatility (annualized) | 8.9%Best | 11.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -12.3%Best | -19.3% |
| $10,000 over 1.2 years | $10,407 | $11,218Best |
| Fund Family | Goldman Sachs Asset Management | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Alternative | Equity |
| Style | - | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Dec 30, 2024 | May 24, 2001 |
Not shown on this pair: YTD Return, 1Y Return, 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized), Top 10 Weight.
The two price series end 185 days apart, so a return over any period would be measuring two different stretches of market. Those rows are withheld. GBXA has data through Mar 31, 2026 and VTI through Oct 2, 2026.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jan 2, 2025 to Mar 31, 2026 (1.2 years).
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 11.9% compared with 8.9% for GBXA. 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 -12.3% for GBXA and -19.3% 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
GBXA charges 0.50% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $50 vs $3 annually, a gap of $47 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GBXA currently yields 0.34% against 1.03% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 1 holding in GBXA and 3,463 in VTI, totalling 99.9% and 98.1% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
The two holdings books were reported 212 days apart, GBXA as of Dec 31, 2025 and VTI as of Jul 31, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
0 positions in common, counted across the 1 positions we hold weights for in GBXA and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 6 and 3,524.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of GBXA and VTI you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GBXA or VTI?
GBXA has an expense ratio of 0.50% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $47 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which is riskier, GBXA or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 11.9% annualized versus 8.9% for GBXA. Worst drawdown: GBXA -12.3% vs VTI -19.3%.
Should I hold both GBXA and VTI?
GBXA 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.
Which pays a higher dividend, GBXA or VTI?
GBXA yields 0.34% while VTI yields 1.03%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than GBXA?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.