IMCG vs VTI
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. IMCG delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 3,543 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IMCG | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.06% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $4.2B | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.63% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 265 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +21.85% | +13.14% | |
| 1Y Return | +22.74% | +22.35% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +19.53% | +21.83% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.55% | +12.01% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.8% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -59.0% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Jun 28, 2004 | May 24, 2001 |
IMCG vs VTI Performance
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF (IMCG) 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 IMCG returned +22.74% while VTI returned +22.35%. Year to date, IMCG is up 21.85% versus a gain of 13.14% for VTI.
Over three years, IMCG compounded at +19.53% per year against +21.83% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +7.55% and +12.01% respectively. Across the full 22-year window we track, IMCG has the edge at +11.20% annualized vs +8.09%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IMCG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.8% compared with 15.3% 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 -59.0% for IMCG 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 0.93. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IMCG charges 0.06% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $6 vs $3 annually, a gap of $3 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IMCG currently yields 0.63% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
IMCG and VTI share 237 holdings out of 2811 unique holdings combined, representing a 13.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IMCG or VTI?
IMCG has an expense ratio of 0.06% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $3 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IMCG or VTI?
Over the past year IMCG returned +22.74% vs +22.35% for VTI, so IMCG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (22 years), IMCG annualized +11.20% vs +8.09% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IMCG or VTI?
IMCG has been the more volatile fund at 17.8% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: IMCG -59.0% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both IMCG and VTI?
IMCG and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.93, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between IMCG and VTI?
IMCG and VTI share 237 common holdings with a 13.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2811 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IMCG or VTI?
IMCG yields 0.63% while VTI yields 1.07%, so VTI 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.