GJUN vs VTI

GJUN vs VTI

Which is better, GJUN or VTI?

Multi Alternative against Large Cap Blend.

VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.93.

Lower Fees: VTIHigher Returns: VTI

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

MetricGJUNVTI
Expense Ratio0.85%0.03%Best
AUM$533M$666.9B
Dividend Yield0.00%1.03%
Holdings103,543
YTD Return+5.03%+11.06%Best
1Y Return+7.48%+15.41%Best
3Y Return (annualized)+11.16%+20.48%Best
5Y Return (annualized)-+11.52%
Volatility (annualized)6.0%Best13.1%
Max Drawdown-11.0%Best-19.3%
$10,000 over 3.2 years$13,864$17,637Best
Fund FamilyFirst Trust Portfolios (US)Vanguard (US)
CategoryAlternativeEquity
StyleMulti AlternativeLarge Cap Blend
InceptionJun 16, 2023May 24, 2001

Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.

Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 20, 2023 to Sep 16, 2026 (3.2 years).

GJUN 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 3.2 years both funds cover.

GJUN vs VTI Performance

FT Vest US Equity Moderate Buffer ETF - June (GJUN) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year GJUN returned +7.48% while VTI returned +15.41%. Year to date, GJUN is up 5.03% versus a gain of 11.06% for VTI.

Over three years, GJUN compounded at +11.16% per year against +20.48% for VTI.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns

VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 13.1% compared with 6.0% for GJUN. 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 -11.0% for GJUN 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 0.93. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.

Fees and Cost Over Time

GJUN charges 0.85% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $85 vs $3 annually, a gap of $82 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GJUN currently yields 0.00% against 1.03% for VTI.

You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.

Whichever of GJUN and VTI you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.

GJUNVTI

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, GJUN or VTI?

GJUN has an expense ratio of 0.85% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $82 a year on a $10,000 investment.

Which performed better, GJUN or VTI?

Over the past year GJUN returned +7.48% vs +15.41% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which is riskier, GJUN or VTI?

VTI has been the more volatile fund at 13.1% annualized versus 6.0% for GJUN. Worst drawdown: GJUN -11.0% vs VTI -19.3%.

Should I hold both GJUN and VTI?

GJUN and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.93, 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, GJUN or VTI?

GJUN yields 0.00% while VTI yields 1.03%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is VTI better than GJUN?

VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.93. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.