NGIF vs VOO

NGIF vs VOO

Which is better, NGIF or VOO?

VOO has been ahead.

VOO has a lower expense ratio. VOO led over 1Y. NGIF is less concentrated, with 37.2% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.6%.

Lower Fees: VOOHigher Returns (1Y): VOOLess Concentrated: NGIF

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

MetricNGIFVOO
Expense Ratio0.88%0.03%Best
AUM-$997.4B
Dividend Yield0.00%1.04%
Holdings66509
YTD Return-3.55%+12.37%Best
1Y Return-+16.61%
3Y Return (annualized)-+21.37%
5Y Return (annualized)-+13.49%
Top 10 Weight37.2%Best37.6%
Fund FamilyNuveenVanguard (US)
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap BlendLarge Cap Blend
InceptionJun 2, 2026Sep 7, 2010

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

NGIF vs VOO 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.

NGIF vs VOO Performance

Nuveen Global Infrastructure Fund ETF (NGIF) is an ETF from Nuveen and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Year to date, NGIF is down 3.55% versus a gain of 12.37% for VOO.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Fees and Cost Over Time

NGIF charges 0.88% per year while VOO charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $88 vs $3 annually, a gap of $85 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, NGIF currently yields 0.00% against 1.04% for VOO.

Holdings Overlap

NGIF already in VOO49.7%
VOO already in NGIF2.4%

49.7% of NGIF's money is in holdings VOO also owns. 2.4% of VOO's money is in holdings NGIF also owns.

The two portfolios partly overlap.

23 positions in common, counted across the 65 positions we hold weights for in NGIF and 494 in VOO, against full books of 66 and 509.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 464 positions for VOO that do not appear in our book for NGIF (96.8% of the fund), and 7 for NGIF that do not appear in VOO (8.5%).

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 NGIFWeight in VOODifference
NEENextera Energy Inc4.70%0.28%4.42%
AEPAmerican Electric Power Co Inc4.60%0.11%4.49%
ETREntergy Corp.4.60%0.08%4.52%
XELXcel Energy Inc.3.80%0.08%3.72%
LNTAlliant Energy Corp.3.30%0.03%3.27%
NINisource Inc.3.00%0.03%2.97%
WMBWilliams Cos. Inc.2.70%0.14%2.56%
TRGPTarga Resources Corp Preferred2.60%0.09%2.51%
AEEAmeren Corporation Utilities2.50%0.05%2.45%
WMWaste Mgmt2.10%0.13%1.97%

49.7% of NGIF is already inside VOO.

You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.

NGIFVOO

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, NGIF or VOO?

NGIF has an expense ratio of 0.88% while VOO charges 0.03%. VOO is the cheaper option, by $85 a year on a $10,000 investment.

What is the holdings overlap between NGIF and VOO?

49.7% of NGIF's money is in holdings VOO also owns. 2.4% of VOO's is in holdings NGIF also owns. They hold 23 positions in common, counted across the 65 positions we hold weights for in NGIF and 494 in VOO.

Which pays a higher dividend, NGIF or VOO?

NGIF yields 0.00% while VOO yields 1.04%, so VOO currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is VOO better than NGIF?

VOO has a lower expense ratio. VOO led over 1Y. NGIF is less concentrated, with 37.2% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.