ORBX vs VTI

ORBX vs VTI

Which is better, ORBX or VTI?

VTI costs less.

VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI is less concentrated, with 33.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 71.8%.

Lower Fees: VTILess Concentrated: VTI

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

MetricORBXVTI
Expense Ratio0.50%0.03%Best
AUM$19M$666.9B
Dividend Yield0.00%1.03%
Holdings403,543
YTD Return-18.16%+12.43%Best
1Y Return-+15.92%
3Y Return (annualized)-+22.42%
5Y Return (annualized)-+12.37%
Top 10 Weight71.8%33.3%Best
Fund FamilyGlobal X by mirae AssetVanguard (US)
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap BlendLarge Cap Blend
InceptionApr 14, 2026May 24, 2001

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

ORBX 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.

ORBX vs VTI Performance

Global X Space Tech ETF (ORBX) is an ETF from Global X by mirae Asset and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Year to date, ORBX is down 18.16% versus a gain of 12.43% for VTI.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Fees and Cost Over Time

ORBX charges 0.50% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $50 vs $3 annually, a gap of $47 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ORBX currently yields 0.00% against 1.03% for VTI.

Holdings Overlap

ORBX already in VTI55.1%
VTI already in ORBX0.1%

55.1% of ORBX's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 0.1% of VTI's money is in holdings ORBX also owns.

The two portfolios partly overlap.

15 positions in common, counted across the 34 positions we hold weights for in ORBX and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 40 and 3,543.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 1,144 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for ORBX (97.3% of the fund), and 2 for ORBX that do not appear in VTI (22.5%).

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 ORBXWeight in VTIDifference
RKLBRocket Lab Corp9.60%0.05%9.55%
ASTSAst Spacemobile Inc Class A9.38%0.02%9.36%
GSATGlobalstar Inc4.67%0.01%4.66%
IRDMIridium Communications Inc4.66%0.01%4.65%
VSATViasat Inc4.32%0.01%4.31%
RDWRedwire Corp4.25%0.00%4.25%
PLPLANET LABS PBC4.21%0.01%4.20%
LUNRIntuitive Machines Inc A4.17%0.00%4.17%
FLYFirefly Aerospace Inc4.00%0.00%4.00%
BKSYBLACKSKY TECHNOLOGY INC1.48%0.00%1.48%

55.1% of ORBX 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.

ORBXVTI

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, ORBX or VTI?

ORBX has an expense ratio of 0.50% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $47 a year on a $10,000 investment.

What is the holdings overlap between ORBX and VTI?

55.1% of ORBX's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 0.1% of VTI's is in holdings ORBX also owns. They hold 15 positions in common, counted across the 34 positions we hold weights for in ORBX and 3,463 in VTI.

Which pays a higher dividend, ORBX or VTI?

ORBX yields 0.00% while VTI yields 1.03%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is VTI better than ORBX?

VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI is less concentrated, with 33.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 71.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.