LGLV vs VOO
State Street SPDR US Large Cap Low Volatility Index ETF vs Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, LGLV or VOO?
VOO has been ahead.
VOO has a lower expense ratio. VOO led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. LGLV is less concentrated, with 15.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.6%.
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 | LGLV | VOO |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.12% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $1.2B | $997.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 2.00% | 1.04% |
| Holdings | 174 | 509 |
| YTD Return | +1.41% | +13.21%Best |
| 1Y Return | +2.01% | +17.37%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +11.19% | +22.66%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.15% | +13.14%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.0%Best | 14.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -37.0% | -34.3%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $14,124 | $18,539Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 15.9%Best | 37.6% |
| Fund Family | State Street Investment Management | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Feb 20, 2013 | Sep 7, 2010 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 21, 2013 to Sep 24, 2026 (13.6 years).
LGLV vs VOO 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 13.6 years both funds cover.
LGLV vs VOO Performance
State Street SPDR US Large Cap Low Volatility Index ETF (LGLV) is an ETF from State Street Investment Management and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year LGLV returned +2.01% while VOO returned +17.37%. Year to date, LGLV is up 1.41% versus a gain of 13.21% for VOO.
Over three years, LGLV compounded at +11.19% per year against +22.66% for VOO; over five years the annualized figures are +7.15% and +13.14% respectively. Across the full 14-year window we track, VOO has the edge at +13.43% annualized vs +9.20%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VOO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.3% compared with 13.0% for LGLV. 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 -37.0% for LGLV and -34.3% for VOO. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.84. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
LGLV charges 0.12% per year while VOO charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $12 vs $3 annually, a gap of $9 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LGLV currently yields 2.00% against 1.04% for VOO.
Holdings Overlap
81.8% of LGLV's money is in holdings VOO also owns. 35.3% of VOO's money is in holdings LGLV also owns.
Most of LGLV is already inside VOO. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
121 positions in common, counted across the 172 positions we hold weights for in LGLV and 494 in VOO, against full books of 174 and 509.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 367 positions for VOO that do not appear in our book for LGLV (64.0% of the fund), and 47 for LGLV that do not appear in VOO (16.7%).
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 LGLV | Weight in VOO | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple, Inc | 0.71% | 7.05% | 6.34% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 0.75% | 5.36% | 4.61% |
| WELLWelltower, Inc. | 4.56% | 0.26% | 4.30% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 0.39% | 3.24% | 2.85% |
| BRK.BBerkshire Hathaway Inc Brk/B Us Equity | 0.91% | 1.46% | 0.55% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 1.05% | 0.96% | 0.09% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 1.01% | 0.93% | 0.08% |
| ORealty Income Corp. | 1.76% | 0.09% | 1.67% |
| KOCoca-Cola Co. (The) | 1.17% | 0.53% | 0.64% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 0.99% | 0.71% | 0.28% |
81.8% of LGLV is already inside VOO.
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, LGLV or VOO?
LGLV has an expense ratio of 0.12% while VOO charges 0.03%. VOO is the cheaper option, by $9 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, LGLV or VOO?
Over the past year LGLV returned +2.01% vs +17.37% for VOO, so VOO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (14 years), LGLV annualized +9.20% vs +13.43% for VOO. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, LGLV or VOO?
VOO has been the more volatile fund at 14.3% annualized versus 13.0% for LGLV. Worst drawdown: LGLV -37.0% vs VOO -34.3%.
Should I hold both LGLV and VOO?
LGLV and VOO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.84, 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 LGLV and VOO?
81.8% of LGLV's money is in holdings VOO also owns. 35.3% of VOO's is in holdings LGLV also owns. They hold 121 positions in common, counted across the 172 positions we hold weights for in LGLV and 494 in VOO.
Which pays a higher dividend, LGLV or VOO?
LGLV yields 2.00% while VOO yields 1.04%, so LGLV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VOO better than LGLV?
VOO has a lower expense ratio. VOO led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. LGLV is less concentrated, with 15.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.