LCLG vs VTI
Logan Capital Large Cap Growth ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, LCLG or VTI?
Large Cap Growth against Large Cap Blend.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. LCLG led over 3Y and the full window, VTI over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. VTI is less concentrated, with 34.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.4%.
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 | LCLG | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.85% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $100M | $689.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 114 | 3,542 |
| YTD Return | +9.92% | +12.23%Best |
| 1Y Return | +9.49% | +12.74%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +25.21%Best | +21.44% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +10.83% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.6% | 14.3%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -25.8% | -19.3%Best |
| $10,000 over 4.3 years | $21,481Best | $19,213 |
| Top 10 Weight | 44.4% | 34.6%Best |
| Fund Family | Logan Capital | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Aug 8, 2022 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 4.3 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 8, 2022 to Nov 11, 2026 (4.3 years).
LCLG 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 4.3 years both funds cover.
LCLG vs VTI Performance
Logan Capital Large Cap Growth ETF (LCLG) is an ETF from Logan Capital and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year LCLG returned +9.49% while VTI returned +12.74%. Year to date, LCLG is up 9.92% versus a gain of 12.23% for VTI.
Over three years, LCLG compounded at +25.21% per year against +21.44% for VTI. Across the full 4-year window we track, LCLG has the edge at +19.46% annualized vs +16.40%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
LCLG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.6% compared with 14.3% 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 -25.8% for LCLG and -19.3% 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 0.94. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
LCLG charges 0.85% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $85 vs $3 annually, a gap of $82 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LCLG currently yields 0.00% against 1.06% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
96.3% of LCLG's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 25.7% of VTI's money is in holdings LCLG also owns.
Most of LCLG is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
51 positions in common, counted across the 55 positions we hold weights for in LCLG and 3,464 in VTI, against full books of 114 and 3,542.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,079 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for LCLG (71.2% of the fund), and 1 for LCLG that do not appear in VTI (0.9%).
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 LCLG | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple Inc | 5.19% | 6.63% | 1.44% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.98% | 3.30% | 0.68% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 5.20% | 1.64% | 3.56% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 4.46% | 2.28% | 2.18% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 3.82% | 2.76% | 1.06% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 4.11% | 2.18% | 1.93% |
| APHAmphenol Corp. Class A | 5.72% | 0.28% | 5.44% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 2.63% | 2.18% | 0.45% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 4.01% | 0.59% | 3.42% |
| KLACKla Corp. | 4.21% | 0.35% | 3.86% |
96.3% of LCLG 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, LCLG or VTI?
LCLG has an expense ratio of 0.85% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $82 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, LCLG or VTI?
Over the past year LCLG returned +9.49% vs +12.74% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), LCLG annualized +19.46% vs +16.40% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, LCLG or VTI?
LCLG has been the more volatile fund at 19.6% annualized versus 14.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: LCLG -25.8% vs VTI -19.3%.
Should I hold both LCLG and VTI?
LCLG and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between LCLG and VTI?
96.3% of LCLG's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 25.7% of VTI's is in holdings LCLG also owns. They hold 51 positions in common, counted across the 55 positions we hold weights for in LCLG and 3,464 in VTI.
Which pays a higher dividend, LCLG or VTI?
LCLG yields 0.00% while VTI yields 1.06%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than LCLG?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. LCLG led over 3Y and the full window, VTI over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. VTI is less concentrated, with 34.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.4%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.