JETS vs VTI
US Global Jets ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, JETS or VTI?
Mid Cap Value against Large Cap Blend.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. VTI is less concentrated, with 33.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 61.8%.
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 | JETS | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.60% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $749M | $666.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.82% | 1.03% |
| Holdings | 56 | 3,543 |
| YTD Return | +2.44% | +13.60%Best |
| 1Y Return | +18.00% | +18.17%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.15% | +23.04%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +3.75% | +12.14%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 30.3% | 15.5%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -64.9% | -35.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $12,021 | $17,734Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 61.8% | 33.3%Best |
| Fund Family | U.S. Global Investors, Inc. | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Value | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Apr 30, 2015 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Apr 30, 2015 to Sep 25, 2026 (11.4 years).
JETS 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 covers the 11.4 years both funds cover.
JETS vs VTI Performance
US Global Jets ETF (JETS) is an ETF from U.S. Global Investors, Inc. and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year JETS returned +18.00% while VTI returned +18.17%. Year to date, JETS is up 2.44% versus a gain of 13.60% for VTI.
Over three years, JETS compounded at +20.15% per year against +23.04% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +3.75% and +12.14% respectively. Across the full 11-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +12.41% annualized vs +2.15%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
JETS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.3% compared with 15.5% 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 -64.9% for JETS 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 0.68. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
JETS charges 0.60% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $60 vs $3 annually, a gap of $57 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, JETS currently yields 0.82% against 1.03% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
71.9% of JETS's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 0.8% of VTI's money is in holdings JETS also owns.
Most of JETS is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
16 positions in common, counted across the 49 positions we hold weights for in JETS and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 56 and 3,543.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,139 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for JETS (96.6% of the fund), and 2 for JETS that do not appear in VTI (0.8%).
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.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in JETS | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| UALUnited Airlines Holdings Inc. | 10.54% | 0.05% | 10.49% |
| DALDl Co., Ltd. | 10.33% | 0.08% | 10.25% |
| AALAmerican Airlines Group Inc. | 9.79% | 0.01% | 9.78% |
| LUVSouthwest Airlines Co. | 9.38% | 0.03% | 9.35% |
| SKYWSkywest Inc | 3.91% | 0.01% | 3.90% |
| JBLUJetblue Airways Corp | 3.37% | 0.00% | 3.37% |
| ALKAlaska Air Group Inc. | 3.23% | 0.01% | 3.22% |
| ALGTAllegiant Travel Co Common Stock Usd 0.001 | 3.21% | 0.00% | 3.21% |
| ULCCFrontier Group Holdings, Inc. | 3.20% | 0.00% | 3.20% |
| EXPEExpedia Group Inc (consumer Discretionary) | 2.73% | 0.05% | 2.68% |
71.9% of JETS is already inside VTI.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, JETS or VTI?
JETS has an expense ratio of 0.60% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $57 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, JETS or VTI?
Over the past year JETS returned +18.00% vs +18.17% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (11 years), JETS annualized +2.15% vs +12.41% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, JETS or VTI?
JETS has been the more volatile fund at 30.3% annualized versus 15.5% for VTI. Worst drawdown: JETS -64.9% vs VTI -35.0%.
Should I hold both JETS and VTI?
JETS and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.68, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between JETS and VTI?
71.9% of JETS's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 0.8% of VTI's is in holdings JETS also owns. They hold 16 positions in common, counted across the 49 positions we hold weights for in JETS and 3,463 in VTI.
Which pays a higher dividend, JETS or VTI?
JETS yields 0.82% while VTI yields 1.03%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than JETS?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. VTI is less concentrated, with 33.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 61.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.