IBDW vs VTI
iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Corporate ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 3,543 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IBDW | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.10% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $2.6B | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 4.81% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 610 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +0.18% | +12.65% | |
| 1Y Return | +2.58% | +21.39% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +6.71% | +21.54% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +0.11% | +12.11% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 8.2% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -23.9% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Jun 22, 2021 | May 24, 2001 |
IBDW vs VTI Performance
iShares iBonds Dec 2031 Term Corporate ETF (IBDW) 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 IBDW returned +2.58% while VTI returned +21.39%. Year to date, IBDW is up 0.18% versus a gain of 12.65% for VTI.
Over three years, IBDW compounded at +6.71% per year against +21.54% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +0.11% and +12.11% respectively. Across the full 5-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.07% annualized vs +0.45%. 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 8.2% for IBDW. 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 -23.9% for IBDW 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 0.70. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IBDW charges 0.10% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $10 vs $3 annually, a gap of $7 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IBDW currently yields 4.81% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
IBDW and VTI share 0 holdings out of 3217 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IBDW or VTI?
IBDW has an expense ratio of 0.10% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $7 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IBDW or VTI?
Over the past year IBDW returned +2.58% vs +21.39% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (5 years), IBDW annualized +0.45% vs +8.07% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IBDW or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 8.2% for IBDW. Worst drawdown: IBDW -23.9% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both IBDW and VTI?
IBDW and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.70, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IBDW and VTI?
IBDW and VTI share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 3217 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IBDW or VTI?
IBDW yields 4.81% while VTI yields 1.07%, so IBDW 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.