MUC vs VTI
BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund, Inc vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, MUC or VTI?
Municipal California against Large Cap Blend.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window.
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 | MUC | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 2.82% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $1.4B | $666.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 5.66% | 1.03% |
| Holdings | 213 | 3,543 |
| YTD Return | +0.44% | +12.57%Best |
| 1Y Return | +1.23% | +17.22%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +6.09% | +20.87%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -3.39% | +11.86%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.9%Best | 15.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -55.3%Best | -56.6% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $8,416 | $17,514Best |
| Fund Family | BlackRock, Inc. (US) | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Tax Preferred | Equity |
| Style | Municipal California | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Feb 27, 1998 | May 24, 2001 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: May 31, 2001 to Sep 11, 2026 (25.3 years).
MUC 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.
MUC vs VTI Performance
BlackRock MuniHoldings California Quality Fund, Inc (MUC) is an ETF from BlackRock, Inc. (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year MUC returned +1.23% while VTI returned +17.22%. Year to date, MUC is up 0.44% versus a gain of 12.57% for VTI.
Over three years, MUC compounded at +6.09% per year against +20.87% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are -3.39% and +11.86% respectively. Across the full 25-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.05% annualized vs +0.14%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.3% compared with 12.9% 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 -55.3% for MUC and -56.6% 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 0.25. They move largely independently of each other.
Fees and Cost Over Time
MUC charges 2.82% per year while VTI 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 5.66% against 1.03% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 84 holdings in MUC and 2,787 in VTI, totalling 82.2% and 90.6% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
The two holdings books were reported 150 days apart, MUC as of Jan 31, 2026 and VTI as of Jun 30, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
0 positions in common, counted across the 84 positions we hold weights for in MUC and 2,787 in VTI, against full books of 213 and 3,543.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of MUC and VTI you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, MUC or VTI?
MUC has an expense ratio of 2.82% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $279 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, MUC or VTI?
Over the past year MUC returned +1.23% vs +17.22% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (25 years), MUC annualized +0.14% vs +8.05% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, MUC or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 12.9% for MUC. Worst drawdown: MUC -55.3% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both MUC and VTI?
MUC and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.25, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, MUC or VTI?
MUC yields 5.66% while VTI yields 1.03%, so MUC currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than MUC?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.