IBD vs VTI
Inspire Corporate Bond ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, IBD or VTI?
VTI has been ahead.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IBD is less concentrated, with 23.8% 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 | IBD | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.41% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $501M | $690.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 4.32% | 1.03% |
| Holdings | 501 | 3,524 |
| YTD Return | -1.77% | +14.35%Best |
| 1Y Return | -1.13% | +17.97%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +4.91% | +22.47%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +0.88% | +12.62%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 5.0%Best | 16.4% |
| Max Drawdown | -16.3%Best | -35.0% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $10,448 | $18,117Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 23.8%Best | 33.3% |
| Fund Family | Inspire ETFs | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity |
| Style | - | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jul 10, 2017 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 11, 2017 to Oct 13, 2026 (9.3 years).
IBD 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
IBD vs VTI Performance
Inspire Corporate Bond ETF (IBD) is an ETF from Inspire ETFs and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year IBD returned -1.13% while VTI returned +17.97%. Year to date, IBD is down 1.77% versus a gain of 14.35% for VTI.
Over three years, IBD compounded at +4.91% per year against +22.47% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +0.88% and +12.62% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +13.81% annualized vs +0.95%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.4% compared with 5.0% for IBD. 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 -16.3% for IBD 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 0.60. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IBD charges 0.41% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $41 vs $3 annually, a gap of $38 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IBD currently yields 4.32% against 1.03% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 238 holdings in IBD and 3,463 in VTI, totalling 97.7% and 98.1% 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 46 days apart, IBD as of Sep 15, 2026 and VTI as of Jul 31, 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 238 positions we hold weights for in IBD and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 501 and 3,524.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,145 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for IBD (97.5% of the fund), and 233 for IBD that do not appear in VTI (97.7%).
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 IBD and VTI 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, IBD or VTI?
IBD has an expense ratio of 0.41% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $38 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IBD or VTI?
Over the past year IBD returned -1.13% vs +17.97% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), IBD annualized +0.95% vs +13.81% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IBD or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 16.4% annualized versus 5.0% for IBD. Worst drawdown: IBD -16.3% vs VTI -35.0%.
Should I hold both IBD and VTI?
IBD and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.60, 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, IBD or VTI?
IBD yields 4.32% while VTI yields 1.03%, so IBD currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than IBD?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IBD is less concentrated, with 23.8% 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.