MFUT vs VTI
Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF vs Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. MFUT delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 2783 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | MFUT | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.89% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $41M | $663.5B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 143 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +16.74% | +14.22% | |
| 1Y Return | +31.69% | +22.19% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +21.27% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.23% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.6% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -29.3% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | Cambria Investment Management | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Allocation/Balanced | Equity | |
| Inception | May 29, 2024 | May 24, 2001 |
MFUT vs VTI Performance
Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF (MFUT) is a ETF from Cambria Investment Management and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year MFUT returned +31.69% while VTI returned +22.19%. Year to date, MFUT is up 16.74% versus a gain of 14.22% for VTI.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.3% compared with 14.6% for MFUT. 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 -29.3% for MFUT and -56.6% for VTI. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.46. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
MFUT charges 0.89% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $89 vs $3 annually, a gap of $86 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, MFUT currently yields 0.00% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
MFUT and VTI share 45 holdings out of 2801 unique holdings combined, representing a 10.3% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, MFUT or VTI?
MFUT has an expense ratio of 0.89% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $86 per year of difference.
Which performed better, MFUT or VTI?
Over the past year MFUT returned +31.69% vs +22.19% for VTI, so MFUT leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), MFUT annualized -1.49% vs +8.14% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, MFUT or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 14.6% for MFUT. Worst drawdown: MFUT -29.3% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both MFUT and VTI?
MFUT and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.46, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between MFUT and VTI?
MFUT and VTI share 45 common holdings with a 10.3% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2801 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, MFUT or VTI?
MFUT yields 0.00% while VTI yields 1.07%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.