QRMI vs VTI
Global X NASDAQ 100 Risk Managed Income ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, QRMI or VTI?
Large Cap Growth against Large Cap Blend.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. VTI is less concentrated, with 33.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 47.7%.
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 | QRMI | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.60% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $14M | $690.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 12.42% | 1.03% |
| Holdings | 107 | 3,524 |
| YTD Return | +4.76% | +14.27%Best |
| 1Y Return | +8.58% | +16.92%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +8.45% | +22.74%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +2.60% | +12.48%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 7.7%Best | 15.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -20.9%Best | -25.4% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $11,369 | $18,004Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 47.7% | 33.3%Best |
| Fund Family | GLOBALXETFS | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Aug 25, 2021 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 26, 2021 to Oct 7, 2026 (5.1 years).
QRMI 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 5.1 years both funds cover.
QRMI vs VTI Performance
Global X NASDAQ 100 Risk Managed Income ETF (QRMI) is an ETF from GLOBALXETFS and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year QRMI returned +8.58% while VTI returned +16.92%. Year to date, QRMI is up 4.76% versus a gain of 14.27% for VTI.
Over three years, QRMI compounded at +8.45% per year against +22.74% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +2.60% and +12.48% respectively.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.9% compared with 7.7% for QRMI. 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 -20.9% for QRMI and -25.4% 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 0.78. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
QRMI charges 0.60% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $60 vs $3 annually, a gap of $57 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, QRMI currently yields 12.42% against 1.03% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
96.0% of QRMI's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 47.5% of VTI's money is in holdings QRMI also owns.
Most of QRMI is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
The two holdings books were reported 46 days apart, QRMI as of Sep 15, 2026 and VTI as of Jul 31, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
90 positions in common, counted across the 101 positions we hold weights for in QRMI and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 107 and 3,524.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,060 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for QRMI (49.9% of the fund), and 5 for QRMI that do not appear in VTI (2.7%).
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 QRMI | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.54% | 6.40% | 2.14% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 7.89% | 6.29% | 1.60% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.95% | 4.79% | 1.16% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.47% | 3.65% | 0.82% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 4.91% | 1.29% | 3.62% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 3.19% | 2.90% | 0.29% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.77% | 2.56% | 0.21% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 2.96% | 2.31% | 0.65% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 3.76% | 1.08% | 2.68% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 3.10% | 1.70% | 1.40% |
96.0% of QRMI 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.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, QRMI or VTI?
QRMI has an expense ratio of 0.60% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $57 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, QRMI or VTI?
Over the past year QRMI returned +8.58% vs +16.92% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, QRMI or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.9% annualized versus 7.7% for QRMI. Worst drawdown: QRMI -20.9% vs VTI -25.4%.
Should I hold both QRMI and VTI?
QRMI and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.78, 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 QRMI and VTI?
96.0% of QRMI's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 47.5% of VTI's is in holdings QRMI also owns. They hold 90 positions in common, counted across the 101 positions we hold weights for in QRMI and 3,463 in VTI.
Which pays a higher dividend, QRMI or VTI?
QRMI yields 12.42% while VTI yields 1.03%, so QRMI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than QRMI?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. VTI is less concentrated, with 33.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 47.7%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.