GLOF vs VTI
iShares Global Equity Factor ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. GLOF delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 3,543 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GLOF | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.20% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $225M | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.58% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 708 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +16.48% | +13.48% | |
| 1Y Return | +23.58% | +19.90% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.42% | +20.94% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.97% | +11.75% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.0% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -36.7% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Apr 28, 2015 | May 24, 2001 |
GLOF vs VTI Performance
iShares Global Equity Factor ETF (GLOF) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year GLOF returned +23.58% while VTI returned +19.90%. Year to date, GLOF is up 16.48% versus a gain of 13.48% for VTI.
Over three years, GLOF compounded at +22.42% per year against +20.94% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +11.97% and +11.75% respectively. Across the full 11-year window we track, GLOF has the edge at +9.30% annualized vs +8.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.3% compared with 15.0% for GLOF. 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 -36.7% for GLOF 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 0.95. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GLOF charges 0.20% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $20 vs $3 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GLOF currently yields 1.58% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
GLOF and VTI share 197 holdings out of 3222 unique holdings combined, representing a 45.5% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GLOF or VTI?
GLOF has an expense ratio of 0.20% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $17 per year of difference.
Which performed better, GLOF or VTI?
Over the past year GLOF returned +23.58% vs +19.90% for VTI, so GLOF leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (11 years), GLOF annualized +9.30% vs +8.10% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, GLOF or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 15.0% for GLOF. Worst drawdown: GLOF -36.7% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both GLOF and VTI?
GLOF and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.95, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between GLOF and VTI?
GLOF and VTI share 197 common holdings with a 45.5% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 3222 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, GLOF or VTI?
GLOF yields 1.58% while VTI yields 1.07%, so GLOF 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.