GMF vs VOO
State Street SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF vs Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, GMF or VOO?
Each has led over a different period.
VOO has a lower expense ratio. GMF led over 1Y, VOO over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. GMF is less concentrated, with 28.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 36.4%.
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 | GMF | VOO |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.49% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $435M | $997.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.22% | 1.08% |
| Holdings | 1,290 | 509 |
| YTD Return | +12.02% | +13.37%Best |
| 1Y Return | +23.25%Best | +20.08% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +18.47% | +21.29%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.06% | +12.89%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.5% | 14.1%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -40.2% | -34.3%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $13,420 | $18,335Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 28.7%Best | 36.4% |
| Fund Family | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Mar 19, 2007 | Sep 7, 2010 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 9, 2010 to Sep 4, 2026 (16 years).
GMF vs VOO 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 16 years both funds cover.
GMF vs VOO Performance
State Street SPDR S&P Emerging Asia Pacific ETF (GMF) is an ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year GMF returned +23.25% while VOO returned +20.08%. Year to date, GMF is up 12.02% versus a gain of 13.37% for VOO.
Over three years, GMF compounded at +18.47% per year against +21.29% for VOO; over five years the annualized figures are +6.06% and +12.89% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, VOO has the edge at +13.48% annualized vs +5.27%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GMF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.5% compared with 14.1% for VOO. 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 -40.2% for GMF and -34.3% for VOO. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.65. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GMF charges 0.49% per year while VOO charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $49 vs $3 annually, a gap of $46 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GMF currently yields 1.22% against 1.08% for VOO.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 1,241 holdings in GMF and 505 in VOO, totalling 99.9% and 99.9% 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 91 days apart, GMF as of Mar 31, 2026 and VOO as of Jun 30, 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 1,241 positions we hold weights for in GMF and 505 in VOO, against full books of 1,290 and 509.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 497 positions for VOO that do not appear in our book for GMF (99.5% of the fund), and 19 for GMF that do not appear in VOO (1.7%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of GMF and VOO 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, GMF or VOO?
GMF has an expense ratio of 0.49% while VOO charges 0.03%. VOO is the cheaper option, by $46 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, GMF or VOO?
Over the past year GMF returned +23.25% vs +20.08% for VOO, so GMF leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), GMF annualized +5.27% vs +13.48% for VOO. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GMF or VOO?
GMF has been the more volatile fund at 16.5% annualized versus 14.1% for VOO. Worst drawdown: GMF -40.2% vs VOO -34.3%.
Should I hold both GMF and VOO?
GMF and VOO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.65, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, GMF or VOO?
GMF yields 1.22% while VOO yields 1.08%, so GMF currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VOO better than GMF?
VOO has a lower expense ratio. GMF led over 1Y, VOO over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. GMF is less concentrated, with 28.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 36.4%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.