QEFA vs VTI
State Street SPDR MSCI EAFE StrategicFactors ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, QEFA or VTI?
VTI has been ahead.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. QEFA is less concentrated, with 14.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.3%.
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 | QEFA | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.30% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $1.1B | $666.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 2.70% | 1.03% |
| Holdings | 659 | 3,543 |
| YTD Return | +8.38% | +11.95%Best |
| 1Y Return | +14.28% | +15.05%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +17.28% | +22.32%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.53% | +12.50%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.3%Best | 15.2% |
| Max Drawdown | -32.7%Best | -35.0% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $15,057 | $18,020Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 14.5%Best | 33.3% |
| Fund Family | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jun 4, 2014 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 5, 2014 to Sep 30, 2026 (12.3 years).
QEFA 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 12.3 years both funds cover.
QEFA vs VTI Performance
State Street SPDR MSCI EAFE StrategicFactors ETF (QEFA) is an ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year QEFA returned +14.28% while VTI returned +15.05%. Year to date, QEFA is up 8.38% versus a gain of 11.95% for VTI.
Over three years, QEFA compounded at +17.28% per year against +22.32% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +8.53% and +12.50% respectively. Across the full 12-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +11.94% annualized vs +5.36%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.2% compared with 13.3% for QEFA. 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 -32.7% for QEFA 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 0.79. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
QEFA charges 0.30% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $30 vs $3 annually, a gap of $27 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, QEFA currently yields 2.70% against 1.03% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
0.3% of QEFA's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 0.1% of VTI's money is in holdings QEFA also owns.
We cannot see either book well enough to say how much of this pair is duplicated.
3 positions in common, counted across the 623 positions we hold weights for in QEFA and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 659 and 3,543.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,147 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for QEFA (97.3% of the fund), and 12 for QEFA that do not appear in VTI (4.8%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of QEFA and VTI you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, QEFA or VTI?
QEFA has an expense ratio of 0.30% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $27 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, QEFA or VTI?
Over the past year QEFA returned +14.28% vs +15.05% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (12 years), QEFA annualized +5.36% vs +11.94% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, QEFA or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.2% annualized versus 13.3% for QEFA. Worst drawdown: QEFA -32.7% vs VTI -35.0%.
Should I hold both QEFA and VTI?
QEFA and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.79, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, QEFA or VTI?
QEFA yields 2.70% while VTI yields 1.03%, so QEFA currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than QEFA?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. QEFA is less concentrated, with 14.5% 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.