KMF vs VTI
Kayne Anderson NextGen Energy & Infrastructure Inc 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 | KMF | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 3.20% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $501M | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 39 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +0.00% | +13.67% | |
| 1Y Return | +0.00% | +22.17% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +4.81% | +21.93% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +5.17% | +12.51% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 33.2% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -94.3% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | Kayne Anderson Capital Advisors | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Nov 24, 2010 | May 24, 2001 |
KMF vs VTI Performance
Kayne Anderson NextGen Energy & Infrastructure Inc (KMF) is a ETF from Kayne Anderson Capital Advisors and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year KMF returned +0.00% while VTI returned +22.17%. Year to date, KMF is up 0.00% versus a gain of 13.67% for VTI.
Over three years, KMF compounded at +4.81% per year against +21.93% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +5.17% and +12.51% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.11% annualized vs -0.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
KMF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 33.2% 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 -94.3% for KMF 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 0.68. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
KMF charges 3.20% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $320 vs $3 annually, a gap of $317 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, KMF currently yields 0.00% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
KMF and VTI share 14 holdings out of 2804 unique holdings combined, representing a 1.9% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, KMF or VTI?
KMF has an expense ratio of 3.20% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $317 per year of difference.
Which performed better, KMF or VTI?
Over the past year KMF returned +0.00% vs +22.17% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), KMF annualized -0.39% vs +8.11% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, KMF or VTI?
KMF has been the more volatile fund at 33.2% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: KMF -94.3% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both KMF and VTI?
KMF and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.68, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between KMF and VTI?
KMF and VTI share 14 common holdings with a 1.9% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2804 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, KMF or VTI?
KMF yields 0.00% 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.