GFLW vs VTI
VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. GFLW delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 3,543 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GFLW | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.39% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $1.0B | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 102 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +20.55% | +13.14% | |
| 1Y Return | +27.65% | +22.35% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +21.83% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.01% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.6% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -24.1% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | Victory Capital Management Inc. | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Dec 3, 2024 | May 24, 2001 |
GFLW vs VTI Performance
VictoryShares Free Cash Flow Growth ETF (GFLW) is a ETF from Victory Capital Management Inc. and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year GFLW returned +27.65% while VTI returned +22.35%. Year to date, GFLW is up 20.55% versus a gain of 13.14% for VTI.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GFLW has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.6% 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 -24.1% for GFLW 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 0.84. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GFLW charges 0.39% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $39 vs $3 annually, a gap of $36 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GFLW currently yields 0.00% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
GFLW and VTI share 88 holdings out of 2799 unique holdings combined, representing a 17.7% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GFLW or VTI?
GFLW has an expense ratio of 0.39% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $36 per year of difference.
Which performed better, GFLW or VTI?
Over the past year GFLW returned +27.65% vs +22.35% for VTI, so GFLW leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), GFLW annualized +19.05% vs +8.09% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, GFLW or VTI?
GFLW has been the more volatile fund at 19.6% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: GFLW -24.1% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both GFLW and VTI?
GFLW and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.84, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between GFLW and VTI?
GFLW and VTI share 88 common holdings with a 17.7% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2799 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, GFLW or VTI?
GFLW yields 0.00% 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.