OMFS vs VTI

OMFS vs VTI

Which is better, OMFS or VTI?

Small Cap Blend against Large Cap Blend.

VTI has a lower expense ratio. OMFS led over 1Y, VTI over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. OMFS is less concentrated, with 12.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.3%.

Lower Fees: VTIHigher Returns: splitLess Concentrated: OMFS

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

MetricOMFSVTI
Expense Ratio0.39%0.03%Best
AUM$278M$666.9B
Dividend Yield1.09%1.03%
Holdings1,1263,543
YTD Return+13.55%Best+11.53%
1Y Return+16.10%Best+15.74%
3Y Return (annualized)+14.85%+20.67%Best
5Y Return (annualized)+6.45%+11.59%Best
Volatility (annualized)21.3%16.8%Best
Max Drawdown-42.5%-35.0%Best
$10,000 over 5 years$13,669$17,303Best
Top 10 Weight12.0%Best33.3%
Fund FamilyInvesco (US)Vanguard (US)
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleSmall Cap BlendLarge Cap Blend
InceptionNov 8, 2017May 24, 2001

Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 10, 2017 to Sep 15, 2026 (8.8 years).

OMFS 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 covers the 8.8 years both funds cover.

OMFS vs VTI Performance

Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year OMFS returned +16.10% while VTI returned +15.74%. Year to date, OMFS is up 13.55% versus a gain of 11.53% for VTI.

Over three years, OMFS compounded at +14.85% per year against +20.67% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +6.45% and +11.59% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +13.38% annualized vs +9.71%.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns

OMFS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 21.3% compared with 16.8% for VTI. 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 -42.5% for OMFS and -35.0% 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 0.85. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.

Fees and Cost Over Time

OMFS charges 0.39% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $39 vs $3 annually, a gap of $36 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, OMFS currently yields 1.09% against 1.03% for VTI.

Holdings Overlap

OMFS already in VTI88.4%
VTI already in OMFS1.8%

88.4% of OMFS's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 1.8% of VTI's money is in holdings OMFS also owns.

Most of OMFS is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.

853 positions in common, counted across the 921 positions we hold weights for in OMFS and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 1,126 and 3,543.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 976 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for OMFS (95.7% of the fund), and 43 for OMFS that do not appear in VTI (6.1%).

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 OMFSWeight in VTIDifference
CTRECaretrust Reit Inc Reit Usd.011.65%0.01%1.64%
FCFSFirstcash Inc1.48%0.01%1.47%
EATBrinker International, Inc.1.23%0.01%1.22%
TRNOTerreno Realty Corp1.13%0.01%1.12%
MYRGMyrgroupinc.1.09%0.01%1.08%
KRYSKrystal Biotech Inc1.03%0.01%1.02%
SLABSilicon Laboratories Inc1.02%0.01%1.01%
PIPRPiper Sandler Companies0.93%0.01%0.92%
VCTRVictory Receivables Corp0.91%0.01%0.90%
MCMoelis & Co_None_00.91%0.01%0.90%

88.4% of OMFS 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.

OMFSVTI

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, OMFS or VTI?

OMFS has an expense ratio of 0.39% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $36 a year on a $10,000 investment.

Which performed better, OMFS or VTI?

Over the past year OMFS returned +16.10% vs +15.74% for VTI, so OMFS leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), OMFS annualized +9.71% vs +13.38% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which is riskier, OMFS or VTI?

OMFS has been the more volatile fund at 21.3% annualized versus 16.8% for VTI. Worst drawdown: OMFS -42.5% vs VTI -35.0%.

Should I hold both OMFS and VTI?

OMFS and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.85, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.

What is the holdings overlap between OMFS and VTI?

88.4% of OMFS's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 1.8% of VTI's is in holdings OMFS also owns. They hold 853 positions in common, counted across the 921 positions we hold weights for in OMFS and 3,463 in VTI.

Which pays a higher dividend, OMFS or VTI?

OMFS yields 1.09% while VTI yields 1.03%, so OMFS currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is VTI better than OMFS?

VTI has a lower expense ratio. OMFS led over 1Y, VTI over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. OMFS is less concentrated, with 12.0% 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.