LCO vs VTI

LCO vs VTI

Which is better, LCO or VTI?

Allocation/Balanced against Large Cap Blend.

VTI has a lower expense ratio. LCO is less concentrated, with 27.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.3%.

Lower Fees: VTILess Concentrated: LCO

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

MetricLCOVTI
Expense Ratio1.13%0.03%Best
AUM$59M$666.9B
Dividend Yield0.00%1.03%
Holdings853,543
YTD Return+12.85%+13.60%Best
1Y Return-+18.17%
3Y Return (annualized)-+23.04%
5Y Return (annualized)-+12.14%
Top 10 Weight27.9%Best33.3%
Fund FamilyLOGIQ Capital LLCVanguard (US)
CategoryAllocation/BalancedEquity
StyleAllocation/BalancedLarge Cap Blend
InceptionJan 8, 2026May 24, 2001

Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.

LCO 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.

LCO vs VTI Performance

LOGIQ Contrarian Opportunities ETF (LCO) is an ETF from LOGIQ Capital LLC and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Year to date, LCO is up 12.85% versus a gain of 13.60% for VTI.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Fees and Cost Over Time

LCO charges 1.13% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $113 vs $3 annually, a gap of $110 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LCO currently yields 0.00% against 1.03% for VTI.

Holdings Overlap

LCO already in VTI52.3%
VTI already in LCO19.9%

52.3% of LCO's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 19.9% of VTI's money is in holdings LCO also owns.

The two portfolios partly overlap.

47 positions in common, counted across the 84 positions we hold weights for in LCO and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 85 and 3,543.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 1,106 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for LCO (77.6% of the fund), and 18 for LCO that do not appear in VTI (26.3%).

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

StockWeight in LCOWeight in VTIDifference
NVDANvidia Corp1.44%6.40%4.96%
AMZNAmazon.Com Inc1.55%3.65%2.10%
GOOGAlphabet Inc2.07%2.31%0.24%
MUMicron Technology, Inc.2.51%1.29%1.22%
SNDKSandisk Corp/De3.28%0.25%3.03%
METAMeta Platforms Inc1.80%1.70%0.10%
INTCIntel Corporation1.84%0.50%1.34%
BTUPeabody Energy Corp2.12%0.00%2.12%
ARAntero Resources Corp2.10%0.01%2.09%
SLBSchlumberger Nv.1.69%0.10%1.59%

52.3% of LCO 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.

LCOVTI

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, LCO or VTI?

LCO has an expense ratio of 1.13% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $110 a year on a $10,000 investment.

What is the holdings overlap between LCO and VTI?

52.3% of LCO's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 19.9% of VTI's is in holdings LCO also owns. They hold 47 positions in common, counted across the 84 positions we hold weights for in LCO and 3,463 in VTI.

Which pays a higher dividend, LCO or VTI?

LCO yields 0.00% while VTI yields 1.03%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is VTI better than LCO?

VTI has a lower expense ratio. LCO is less concentrated, with 27.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.