MUC vs VOO
BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund, Inc vs Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
VOO has a lower expense ratio. VOO delivered stronger 1-year returns. VOO offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | MUC | VOO | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 2.82% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $1.4B | $979.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 5.40% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 213 | 509 | |
| YTD Return | +4.40% | +13.44% | |
| 1Y Return | +11.21% | +22.62% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +6.38% | +21.47% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -3.10% | +13.27% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.8% | 14.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.6% | -34.3% | |
| Fund Family | BlackRock, Inc. (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Tax Preferred | Equity | |
| Inception | Feb 27, 1998 | Sep 7, 2010 |
MUC vs VOO Performance
BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund, Inc (MUC) is a ETF from BlackRock, Inc. (US) and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year MUC returned +11.21% while VOO returned +22.62%. Year to date, MUC is up 4.40% versus a gain of 13.44% for VOO.
Over three years, MUC compounded at +6.38% per year against +21.47% for VOO; over five years the annualized figures are -3.10% and +13.27% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, VOO has the edge at +13.55% annualized vs -0.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VOO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.1% compared with 12.8% for MUC. 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 -56.6% for MUC and -34.3% for VOO. 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 0.32. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
MUC charges 2.82% per year while VOO charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $282 vs $3 annually, a gap of $279 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, MUC currently yields 5.40% against 1.09% for VOO.
Holdings Overlap
MUC and VOO share 0 holdings out of 589 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, MUC or VOO?
MUC has an expense ratio of 2.82% while VOO charges 0.03%. VOO is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $279 per year of difference.
Which performed better, MUC or VOO?
Over the past year MUC returned +11.21% vs +22.62% for VOO, so VOO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), MUC annualized -0.18% vs +13.55% for VOO. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, MUC or VOO?
VOO has been the more volatile fund at 14.1% annualized versus 12.8% for MUC. Worst drawdown: MUC -56.6% vs VOO -34.3%.
Should I hold both MUC and VOO?
MUC and VOO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.32, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between MUC and VOO?
MUC and VOO share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 589 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, MUC or VOO?
MUC yields 5.40% while VOO yields 1.09%, so MUC 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.