ONEV vs VOO
State Street SPDR Russell 1000 Low Volatility Focus ETF vs Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, ONEV or VOO?
Mid Cap Value against Large Cap Blend.
VOO has a lower expense ratio. VOO led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. ONEV is less concentrated, with 9.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 36.4%.
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 | ONEV | VOO |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.20% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $302M | $997.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.79% | 1.04% |
| Holdings | 452 | 509 |
| YTD Return | +9.91% | +12.50%Best |
| 1Y Return | +10.02% | +17.58%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +12.56% | +21.27%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.17% | +12.95%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.5% | 15.1%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -40.2% | -34.3%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $14,809 | $18,384Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 9.3%Best | 36.4% |
| Fund Family | State Street Investment Management | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Value | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Dec 1, 2015 | Sep 7, 2010 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 3, 2015 to Sep 11, 2026 (10.8 years).
ONEV 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 covers the 10.8 years both funds cover.
ONEV vs VOO Performance
State Street SPDR Russell 1000 Low Volatility Focus ETF (ONEV) is an ETF from State Street Investment Management and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year ONEV returned +10.02% while VOO returned +17.58%. Year to date, ONEV is up 9.91% versus a gain of 12.50% for VOO.
Over three years, ONEV compounded at +12.56% per year against +21.27% for VOO; over five years the annualized figures are +8.17% and +12.95% respectively. Across the full 11-year window we track, VOO has the edge at +13.81% annualized vs +9.54%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ONEV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.5% compared with 15.1% for VOO. 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 -40.2% for ONEV and -34.3% for VOO. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.89. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ONEV charges 0.20% per year while VOO charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $20 vs $3 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ONEV currently yields 1.79% against 1.04% for VOO.
Holdings Overlap
65.0% of ONEV's money is in holdings VOO also owns. 8.7% of VOO's money is in holdings ONEV also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
201 positions in common, counted across the 449 positions we hold weights for in ONEV and 505 in VOO, against full books of 452 and 509.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 296 positions for VOO that do not appear in our book for ONEV (90.8% of the fund), and 232 for ONEV that do not appear in VOO (32.3%).
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
| Stock | Weight in ONEV | Weight in VOO | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| ALLAllstate Corp. | 1.54% | 0.09% | 1.45% |
| PGRProgressive Corp. | 1.13% | 0.20% | 0.93% |
| MCKMckesson Corp. | 0.99% | 0.14% | 0.85% |
| TRVTravelers Cos., Inc. | 0.86% | 0.11% | 0.75% |
| ACGLArch Capital Group Ltd 5.450% | 0.91% | 0.05% | 0.86% |
| CICigna Corp. | 0.83% | 0.11% | 0.72% |
| CMCSAComcast Corp. Class A | 0.72% | 0.14% | 0.58% |
| HIGHartford Financial Services Group Inc. | 0.77% | 0.06% | 0.71% |
| CINFCincinnati Financial Corp. | 0.76% | 0.04% | 0.72% |
| CTSHCognizant Technology Solutions Corp. Class A | 0.75% | 0.03% | 0.72% |
65.0% of ONEV 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.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ONEV or VOO?
ONEV has an expense ratio of 0.20% while VOO charges 0.03%. VOO is the cheaper option, by $17 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, ONEV or VOO?
Over the past year ONEV returned +10.02% vs +17.58% for VOO, so VOO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (11 years), ONEV annualized +9.54% vs +13.81% for VOO. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, ONEV or VOO?
ONEV has been the more volatile fund at 15.5% annualized versus 15.1% for VOO. Worst drawdown: ONEV -40.2% vs VOO -34.3%.
Should I hold both ONEV and VOO?
ONEV and VOO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.89, 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 ONEV and VOO?
65.0% of ONEV's money is in holdings VOO also owns. 8.7% of VOO's is in holdings ONEV also owns. They hold 201 positions in common, counted across the 449 positions we hold weights for in ONEV and 505 in VOO.
Which pays a higher dividend, ONEV or VOO?
ONEV yields 1.79% while VOO yields 1.04%, so ONEV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VOO better than ONEV?
VOO has a lower expense ratio. VOO led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. ONEV is less concentrated, with 9.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 36.4%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.