IFLN vs VTI
Invesco Bloomberg Enhanced Fallen Angels ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, IFLN or VTI?
High Yield Bond against Large Cap Blend.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IFLN is less concentrated, with 24.4% 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 | IFLN | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.23% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $301M | $666.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 5.94% | 1.03% |
| Holdings | 115 | 3,543 |
| YTD Return | +0.08% | +12.30%Best |
| 1Y Return | +1.55% | +16.08%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +7.11% | +21.01%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +3.17% | +12.36%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 10.3%Best | 16.1% |
| Max Drawdown | -48.8%Best | -55.3% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $11,689 | $17,908Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 24.4%Best | 33.3% |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity |
| Style | High Yield Bond | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Nov 15, 2007 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 15, 2007 to Sep 18, 2026 (18.8 years).
IFLN 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.
IFLN vs VTI Performance
Invesco Bloomberg Enhanced Fallen Angels ETF (IFLN) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year IFLN returned +1.55% while VTI returned +16.08%. Year to date, IFLN is up 0.08% versus a gain of 12.30% for VTI.
Over three years, IFLN compounded at +7.11% per year against +21.01% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +3.17% and +12.36% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +9.59% annualized vs -0.41%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.1% compared with 10.3% for IFLN. 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 -48.8% for IFLN and -55.3% 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 0.72. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IFLN charges 0.23% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $23 vs $3 annually, a gap of $20 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IFLN currently yields 5.94% against 1.03% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 111 holdings in IFLN and 3,463 in VTI, totalling 95.9% and 98.1% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 111 positions we hold weights for in IFLN and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 115 and 3,543.
What only one of them owns
Measured across the 111 and 3,463 positions we hold weights for.
VTI holds 1,150 positions IFLN does not, 97.5% of the fund.
Largest: NVDA 6.40%, AAPL 6.29%, MSFT 4.79%, AMZN 3.65%, GOOGL 2.90%
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IFLN 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, IFLN or VTI?
IFLN has an expense ratio of 0.23% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $20 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IFLN or VTI?
Over the past year IFLN returned +1.55% vs +16.08% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), IFLN annualized -0.41% vs +9.59% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IFLN or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 16.1% annualized versus 10.3% for IFLN. Worst drawdown: IFLN -48.8% vs VTI -55.3%.
Should I hold both IFLN and VTI?
IFLN and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.72, 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, IFLN or VTI?
IFLN yields 5.94% while VTI yields 1.03%, so IFLN currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than IFLN?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IFLN is less concentrated, with 24.4% 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.