PWZ vs VTI
Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 3,543 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | PWZ | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.28% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $1.2B | $666.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 3.73% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 1,175 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | +1.00% | +13.14% | |
| 1Y Return | +7.67% | +22.35% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +3.14% | +21.83% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -0.18% | +12.01% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 7.0% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -24.7% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Tax Preferred | Equity | |
| Inception | Oct 11, 2007 | May 24, 2001 |
PWZ vs VTI Performance
Invesco California AMT-Free Municipal Bond ETF (PWZ) is a ETF from Invesco (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year PWZ returned +7.67% while VTI returned +22.35%. Year to date, PWZ is up 1.00% versus a gain of 13.14% for VTI.
Over three years, PWZ compounded at +3.14% per year against +21.83% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are -0.18% and +12.01% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.09% annualized vs +0.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.3% compared with 7.0% for PWZ. 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 -24.7% for PWZ 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 0.31. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
PWZ charges 0.28% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $28 vs $3 annually, a gap of $25 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, PWZ currently yields 3.73% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
PWZ and VTI share 0 holdings out of 3294 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, PWZ or VTI?
PWZ has an expense ratio of 0.28% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $25 per year of difference.
Which performed better, PWZ or VTI?
Over the past year PWZ returned +7.67% vs +22.35% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), PWZ annualized +0.62% vs +8.09% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, PWZ or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 7.0% for PWZ. Worst drawdown: PWZ -24.7% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both PWZ and VTI?
PWZ and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.31, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between PWZ and VTI?
PWZ and VTI share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 3294 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, PWZ or VTI?
PWZ yields 3.73% while VTI yields 1.07%, so PWZ 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.