OMFS vs VTI
Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. OMFS delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 3,543 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | OMFS | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.39% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $288M | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 1,126 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +19.10% | +13.12% | |
| 1Y Return | +24.73% | +20.82% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.36% | +21.43% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.15% | +11.84% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 21.3% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -42.5% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Nov 8, 2017 | May 24, 2001 |
OMFS vs VTI Performance
Invesco Russell 2000 Dynamic Multifactor ETF (OMFS) is a ETF from Invesco (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year OMFS returned +24.73% while VTI returned +20.82%. Year to date, OMFS is up 19.10% versus a gain of 13.12% for VTI.
Over three years, OMFS compounded at +15.36% per year against +21.43% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +7.15% and +11.84% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, OMFS has the edge at +10.37% annualized vs +8.08%. 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 15.3% 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 -56.6% for VTI. 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 0.85. 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 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
OMFS and VTI share 676 holdings out of 3020 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.2% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
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. On a $10,000 investment, that is $36 per year of difference.
Which performed better, OMFS or VTI?
Over the past year OMFS returned +24.73% vs +20.82% for VTI, so OMFS leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), OMFS annualized +10.37% vs +8.08% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, OMFS or VTI?
OMFS has been the more volatile fund at 21.3% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: OMFS -42.5% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both OMFS and VTI?
OMFS and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.85, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between OMFS and VTI?
OMFS and VTI share 676 common holdings with a 0.2% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 3020 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, OMFS or VTI?
OMFS yields 1.09% while VTI yields 1.07%, so OMFS 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.