LUMA vs VXUS
KraneShares Photonic and Optical ETF vs Vanguard Total International Stock ETF
Which is better, LUMA or VXUS?
Large Cap Growth against Large Cap Blend.
VXUS has a lower expense ratio.
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 | LUMA | VXUS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.00% | 0.05%Best |
| AUM | $2M | $158.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 2.59% |
| Holdings | 28 | 8,747 |
| YTD Return | +1.01% | +16.15%Best |
| 1Y Return | - | +27.58% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +20.48% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +9.09% |
| Fund Family | KraneShares | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jul 15, 2026 | Jan 26, 2011 |
Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window, Top 10 Weight.
LUMA vs VXUS 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.
LUMA vs VXUS Performance
KraneShares Photonic and Optical ETF (LUMA) is an ETF from KraneShares and Vanguard Total International Stock ETF (VXUS) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Year to date, LUMA is up 1.01% versus a gain of 16.15% for VXUS.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
LUMA charges 1.00% per year while VXUS charges 0.05%. On a $10,000 position that is $100 vs $5 annually, a gap of $95 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LUMA currently yields 0.00% against 2.59% for VXUS.
Holdings Overlap
At least 31.7% of LUMA's money is in holdings VXUS also owns.
Stated as a floor: for VXUS, our book for it covers 87.7% of that fund, so a holding it does not list is one we cannot count as shared. The real figure is this or higher.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
The two holdings books were reported 49 days apart, LUMA as of Aug 18, 2026 and VXUS as of Jun 30, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
8 positions in common, counted across the 26 positions we hold weights for in LUMA and 8,094 in VXUS, against full books of 28 and 8,747.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in LUMA | Weight in VXUS | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3081:TWLandmark Optoelectronics Corp | 7.41% | 0.01% | 7.40% |
| 300308:SHZhongji Innolight Co Ltd A | 5.16% | 0.03% | 5.13% |
| TSEM:ILTower Semiconductor Ltd Ordinary Shares | 4.82% | 0.06% | 4.76% |
| 300502:SHEoptolink Technology Inc L-A | 4.46% | 0.02% | 4.44% |
| 6442:TWEzconn Corp. | 3.81% | 0.01% | 3.80% |
| 3363:TWFoci Fiber Optic Communications Inc | 2.87% | 0.00% | 2.87% |
| STM:ASStmicroelectronics N.v. | 2.51% | 0.01% | 2.50% |
| 688498:SHYuanjie Semico-A | 0.62% | 0.01% | 0.61% |
31.7% of LUMA is already inside VXUS.
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, LUMA or VXUS?
LUMA has an expense ratio of 1.00% while VXUS charges 0.05%. VXUS is the cheaper option, by $95 a year on a $10,000 investment.
What is the holdings overlap between LUMA and VXUS?
At least 31.7% of LUMA's money is in holdings VXUS also owns. Our book for VXUS is partial, so the real figure is this or higher. They hold 8 positions in common, counted across the 26 positions we hold weights for in LUMA and 8,094 in VXUS.
Which pays a higher dividend, LUMA or VXUS?
LUMA yields 0.00% while VXUS yields 2.59%, so VXUS currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VXUS better than LUMA?
VXUS has a lower expense ratio. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.