OAKG vs VTI

OAKG vs VTI

Which is better, OAKG or VTI?

VTI costs less.

VTI has a lower expense ratio. OAKG is less concentrated, with 31.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.3%.

Lower Fees: VTILess Concentrated: OAKG

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

MetricOAKGVTI
Expense Ratio0.62%0.03%Best
AUM$39M$666.9B
Dividend Yield0.04%1.03%
Holdings563,543
YTD Return+3.01%+12.30%Best
1Y Return-+16.08%
3Y Return (annualized)-+21.01%
5Y Return (annualized)-+12.36%
Top 10 Weight31.4%Best33.3%
Fund FamilyOakmark FundsVanguard (US)
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap BlendLarge Cap Blend
InceptionDec 11, 2025May 24, 2001

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

OAKG 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.

OAKG vs VTI Performance

Oakmark Global Large Cap ETF (OAKG) is an ETF from Oakmark Funds and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Year to date, OAKG is up 3.01% versus a gain of 12.30% for VTI.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Fees and Cost Over Time

OAKG charges 0.62% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $62 vs $3 annually, a gap of $59 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, OAKG currently yields 0.04% against 1.03% for VTI.

Holdings Overlap

OAKG already in VTI50.3%
VTI already in OAKG7.5%

50.3% of OAKG's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 7.5% of VTI's money is in holdings OAKG also owns.

The two portfolios partly overlap.

24 positions in common, counted across the 51 positions we hold weights for in OAKG and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 56 and 3,543.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 1,127 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for OAKG (90.0% of the fund), and 2 for OAKG that do not appear in VTI (4.5%).

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 OAKGWeight in VTIDifference
GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A1.60%2.90%1.30%
IQVI Q V I A Holdings Inc.4.33%0.05%4.28%
CRMSalesforce Inc Crm Us Equity3.91%0.20%3.71%
ABNBAirbnb Inc3.99%0.08%3.91%
METAMeta Platforms Inc1.17%1.70%0.53%
SYYSysco Corp2.63%0.06%2.57%
ELVElevance Health Inc2.50%0.11%2.39%
SUNBSunbelt Rentals2.49%0.04%2.45%
WTW:LNWtw2.49%0.04%2.45%
ICEInternational Exchange, Inc.2.38%0.12%2.26%

50.3% of OAKG 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.

OAKGVTI

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, OAKG or VTI?

OAKG has an expense ratio of 0.62% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $59 a year on a $10,000 investment.

What is the holdings overlap between OAKG and VTI?

50.3% of OAKG's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 7.5% of VTI's is in holdings OAKG also owns. They hold 24 positions in common, counted across the 51 positions we hold weights for in OAKG and 3,463 in VTI.

Which pays a higher dividend, OAKG or VTI?

OAKG yields 0.04% while VTI yields 1.03%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is VTI better than OAKG?

VTI has a lower expense ratio. OAKG is less concentrated, with 31.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.