ISCG vs VTI
iShares Morningstar Small-Cap Growth ETF vs Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. ISCG delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 2783 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ISCG | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.06% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $975M | $663.5B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.57% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 939 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +17.47% | +14.22% | |
| 1Y Return | +27.80% | +22.19% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +17.49% | +21.27% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.29% | +12.23% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.6% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -58.0% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Jun 28, 2004 | May 24, 2001 |
ISCG vs VTI Performance
iShares Morningstar Small-Cap Growth ETF (ISCG) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year ISCG returned +27.80% while VTI returned +22.19%. Year to date, ISCG is up 17.47% versus a gain of 14.22% for VTI.
Over three years, ISCG compounded at +17.49% per year against +21.27% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +6.29% and +12.23% respectively. Across the full 22-year window we track, ISCG has the edge at +9.31% annualized vs +8.14%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ISCG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.6% 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 -58.0% for ISCG 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 0.91. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ISCG 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, ISCG currently yields 0.57% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
ISCG and VTI share 650 holdings out of 3010 unique holdings combined, representing a 2.2% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ISCG or VTI?
ISCG 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, ISCG or VTI?
Over the past year ISCG returned +27.80% vs +22.19% for VTI, so ISCG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (22 years), ISCG annualized +9.31% vs +8.14% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, ISCG or VTI?
ISCG has been the more volatile fund at 19.6% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: ISCG -58.0% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both ISCG and VTI?
ISCG and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, 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 ISCG and VTI?
ISCG and VTI share 650 common holdings with a 2.2% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 3010 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, ISCG or VTI?
ISCG yields 0.57% 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.