LSAF vs VTI
LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, LSAF or VTI?
Mid Cap Blend against Large Cap Blend.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. LSAF led over 1Y, VTI over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. LSAF is less concentrated, with 13.2% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.3%.
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 | LSAF | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.75% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $125M | $666.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.55% | 1.03% |
| Holdings | 103 | 3,543 |
| YTD Return | +19.71%Best | +12.30% |
| 1Y Return | +23.59%Best | +16.08% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +19.92% | +21.01%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.51% | +12.36%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.2% | 17.2%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -41.7% | -35.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,241 | $17,908Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 13.2%Best | 33.3% |
| Fund Family | LeaderShares | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Oct 1, 2018 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 2, 2018 to Sep 18, 2026 (8 years).
LSAF 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 8 years both funds cover.
LSAF vs VTI Performance
LeaderShares AlphaFactor US Core Equity ETF (LSAF) is an ETF from LeaderShares and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year LSAF returned +23.59% while VTI returned +16.08%. Year to date, LSAF is up 19.71% versus a gain of 12.30% for VTI.
Over three years, LSAF compounded at +19.92% per year against +21.01% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +11.51% and +12.36% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +13.33% annualized vs +10.94%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
LSAF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.2% compared with 17.2% 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 -41.7% for LSAF 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 0.92. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
LSAF charges 0.75% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $75 vs $3 annually, a gap of $72 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LSAF currently yields 0.55% against 1.03% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
94.7% of LSAF's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 5.1% of VTI's money is in holdings LSAF also owns.
Most of LSAF is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
97 positions in common, counted across the 101 positions we hold weights for in LSAF and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 103 and 3,543.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,057 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for LSAF (92.3% of the fund), and 1 for LSAF that do not appear in VTI (1.1%).
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 LSAF | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| VVisa Inc Class A | 1.01% | 0.83% | 0.18% |
| RNGRingcentral Inc, Class A | 1.72% | 0.01% | 1.71% |
| PATHUipath Inc Series D-1 | 1.54% | 0.01% | 1.53% |
| MPCMarathon Petroleum Corp | 1.37% | 0.13% | 1.24% |
| VLOValero Energy | 1.27% | 0.13% | 1.14% |
| SCHWSchwab Strategic T | 1.07% | 0.24% | 0.83% |
| IQVI Q V I A Holdings Inc. | 1.25% | 0.05% | 1.20% |
| MCKMckesson Corp. | 1.14% | 0.14% | 1.00% |
| ZBRAZebra Technologies Corp | 1.24% | 0.02% | 1.22% |
| DISWalt Disney Co | 1.02% | 0.23% | 0.79% |
94.7% of LSAF 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, LSAF or VTI?
LSAF has an expense ratio of 0.75% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $72 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, LSAF or VTI?
Over the past year LSAF returned +23.59% vs +16.08% for VTI, so LSAF leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), LSAF annualized +10.94% vs +13.33% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, LSAF or VTI?
LSAF has been the more volatile fund at 19.2% annualized versus 17.2% for VTI. Worst drawdown: LSAF -41.7% vs VTI -35.0%.
Should I hold both LSAF and VTI?
LSAF and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.92, 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 LSAF and VTI?
94.7% of LSAF's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 5.1% of VTI's is in holdings LSAF also owns. They hold 97 positions in common, counted across the 101 positions we hold weights for in LSAF and 3,463 in VTI.
Which pays a higher dividend, LSAF or VTI?
LSAF yields 0.55% while VTI yields 1.03%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than LSAF?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. LSAF led over 1Y, VTI over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. LSAF is less concentrated, with 13.2% 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.