GRPM vs VTI
Invesco S&P MidCap 400 GARP ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, GRPM or VTI?
Small Cap Blend against Large Cap Blend.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. GRPM is less concentrated, with 26.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.3%.
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 | GRPM | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.35% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $507M | $666.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.65% | 1.03% |
| Holdings | 62 | 3,543 |
| YTD Return | +15.34%Best | +12.30% |
| 1Y Return | +13.97% | +16.08%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +17.32% | +21.01%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +10.35% | +12.36%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.4% | 14.6%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -44.5% | -35.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $16,363 | $17,908Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 26.4%Best | 33.3% |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Small Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Dec 3, 2010 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 8, 2010 to Sep 18, 2026 (15.8 years).
GRPM 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 15.8 years both funds cover.
GRPM vs VTI Performance
Invesco S&P MidCap 400 GARP ETF (GRPM) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year GRPM returned +13.97% while VTI returned +16.08%. Year to date, GRPM is up 15.34% versus a gain of 12.30% for VTI.
Over three years, GRPM compounded at +17.32% per year against +21.01% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +10.35% and +12.36% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +12.46% annualized vs +10.56%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GRPM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.4% compared with 14.6% 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 -44.5% for GRPM and -35.0% 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 0.91. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GRPM charges 0.35% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $35 vs $3 annually, a gap of $32 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GRPM currently yields 0.65% against 1.03% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
95.0% of GRPM's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 0.7% of VTI's money is in holdings GRPM also owns.
Most of GRPM is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
57 positions in common, counted across the 61 positions we hold weights for in GRPM and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 62 and 3,543.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,098 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for GRPM (96.8% of the fund), and 3 for GRPM that do not appear in VTI (3.6%).
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.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in GRPM | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| ANFAbercrombie & Fitch Co. Class A | 3.20% | 0.01% | 3.19% |
| HLHecla Mining Co | 2.81% | 0.01% | 2.80% |
| DUOLDuolingo Inc | 2.80% | 0.01% | 2.79% |
| HALOHalozyme Therapeutics Inc | 2.75% | 0.01% | 2.74% |
| IDCCInterdigital Inc | 2.70% | 0.01% | 2.69% |
| APPFAppfolio Inc. Com Usd0.0001 Cl A | 2.67% | 0.01% | 2.66% |
| PCTYPaylocity Holding Corp | 2.41% | 0.01% | 2.40% |
| KNSLKinsale Capital Group Inc | 2.36% | 0.01% | 2.35% |
| RNRRenaissancere Holdings Limited | 2.30% | 0.02% | 2.28% |
| 0RMV:LNTechnipfmc Plc Ordinary Shares | 2.25% | 0.04% | 2.21% |
95.0% of GRPM is already inside VTI.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GRPM or VTI?
GRPM has an expense ratio of 0.35% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $32 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, GRPM or VTI?
Over the past year GRPM returned +13.97% vs +16.08% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), GRPM annualized +10.56% vs +12.46% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GRPM or VTI?
GRPM has been the more volatile fund at 18.4% annualized versus 14.6% for VTI. Worst drawdown: GRPM -44.5% vs VTI -35.0%.
Should I hold both GRPM and VTI?
GRPM and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, 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.
What is the holdings overlap between GRPM and VTI?
95.0% of GRPM's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 0.7% of VTI's is in holdings GRPM also owns. They hold 57 positions in common, counted across the 61 positions we hold weights for in GRPM and 3,463 in VTI.
Which pays a higher dividend, GRPM or VTI?
GRPM yields 0.65% while VTI yields 1.03%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than GRPM?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. GRPM is less concentrated, with 26.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.