MNVT vs VTI

MNVT vs VTI

Which is better, MNVT or VTI?

VTI costs less.

VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI is less concentrated, with 33.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 55.3%.

Lower Fees: VTILess Concentrated: VTI

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

MetricMNVTVTI
Expense Ratio0.75%0.03%Best
AUM$74M$666.9B
Dividend Yield0.00%1.03%
Holdings233,543
YTD Return+15.34%Best+11.06%
1Y Return-+15.41%
3Y Return (annualized)-+20.48%
5Y Return (annualized)-+11.52%
Top 10 Weight55.3%33.3%Best
Fund FamilyMoonvest LLCVanguard (US)
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap BlendLarge Cap Blend
InceptionMar 17, 2026May 24, 2001

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

MNVT 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.

MNVT vs VTI Performance

Moonvest ETF (MNVT) is an ETF from Moonvest LLC and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Year to date, MNVT is up 15.34% versus a gain of 11.06% for VTI.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Fees and Cost Over Time

MNVT 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, MNVT currently yields 0.00% against 1.03% for VTI.

Holdings Overlap

MNVT already in VTI66.8%
VTI already in MNVT0.1%

66.8% of MNVT's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 0.1% of VTI's money is in holdings MNVT also owns.

The two portfolios partly overlap.

14 positions in common, counted across the 22 positions we hold weights for in MNVT and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 23 and 3,543.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 1,147 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for MNVT (97.4% of the fund), and 1 for MNVT that do not appear in VTI (0.0%).

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 MNVTWeight in VTIDifference
CLSKCleanspark Inc6.17%0.00%6.17%
SMCISuper Micro Computer Inc Common Stock USD.0016.08%0.02%6.06%
SRPTSarepta Therapeutics Inc5.90%0.00%5.90%
BMNRBitmine Immersion Technologi5.77%0.01%5.76%
TMDXTransmedics Group Inc5.25%0.00%5.25%
RDWRedwire Corp5.08%0.00%5.08%
COURCoursera Inc5.03%0.00%5.03%
RCATRed Cat Holdings Inc4.82%0.00%4.82%
SMRNuscale Power Corp Class A4.63%0.00%4.63%
IONQIonq, Inc. Pipe3.75%0.02%3.73%

66.8% of MNVT 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.

MNVTVTI

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, MNVT or VTI?

MNVT 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.

What is the holdings overlap between MNVT and VTI?

66.8% of MNVT's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 0.1% of VTI's is in holdings MNVT also owns. They hold 14 positions in common, counted across the 22 positions we hold weights for in MNVT and 3,463 in VTI.

Which pays a higher dividend, MNVT or VTI?

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

Is VTI better than MNVT?

VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI is less concentrated, with 33.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 55.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.