QVAL vs VTI
Alpha Architect US Quantitative Value ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, QVAL or VTI?
Mid Cap Value against Large Cap Blend.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. QVAL led over 1Y and 5Y, VTI over 3Y and the full window. QVAL is less concentrated, with 20.3% 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 | QVAL | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.28% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $708M | $666.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.35% | 1.03% |
| Holdings | 52 | 3,543 |
| YTD Return | +22.86%Best | +12.30% |
| 1Y Return | +30.44%Best | +16.08% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +19.05% | +21.01%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.82%Best | +12.36% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 21.1% | 15.3%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -53.3% | -35.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $19,103Best | $17,908 |
| Top 10 Weight | 20.3%Best | 33.3% |
| Fund Family | Alpha Architect | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Value | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Oct 22, 2014 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 22, 2014 to Sep 18, 2026 (11.9 years).
QVAL 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 11.9 years both funds cover.
QVAL vs VTI Performance
Alpha Architect US Quantitative Value ETF (QVAL) is an ETF from Alpha Architect and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year QVAL returned +30.44% while VTI returned +16.08%. Year to date, QVAL is up 22.86% versus a gain of 12.30% for VTI.
Over three years, QVAL compounded at +19.05% per year against +21.01% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +13.82% and +12.36% respectively. Across the full 12-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +12.54% annualized vs +8.58%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QVAL has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 21.1% compared with 15.3% for VTI. 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 -53.3% for QVAL 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 0.84. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
QVAL 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, QVAL currently yields 1.35% against 1.03% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
98.0% of QVAL's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 3.8% of VTI's money is in holdings QVAL also owns.
Most of QVAL is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
61 positions in common, counted across the 63 positions we hold weights for in QVAL and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 52 and 3,543.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,090 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for QVAL (93.7% of the fund), and 0 for QVAL that do not appear in VTI (0.0%).
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 QVAL | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| TBBAt&t Inc | 1.99% | 0.22% | 1.77% |
| COPConocophillips Common Stock USD 0.01 | 2.00% | 0.20% | 1.80% |
| BMYBristol-Myers Squibb Co. | 2.00% | 0.18% | 1.82% |
| MPCMarathon Petroleum Corp | 2.02% | 0.13% | 1.89% |
| MOAltria Group Inc | 1.98% | 0.16% | 1.82% |
| PSXPhillips 66 | 2.01% | 0.12% | 1.89% |
| VLOValero Energy | 2.00% | 0.13% | 1.87% |
| ADBEAdobe Systems | 1.98% | 0.14% | 1.84% |
| TGTTarget Corp Common Stock Usd.0833 | 2.02% | 0.09% | 1.93% |
| CICigna Corp. | 2.01% | 0.10% | 1.91% |
98.0% of QVAL 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, QVAL or VTI?
QVAL has an expense ratio of 0.28% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $25 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, QVAL or VTI?
Over the past year QVAL returned +30.44% vs +16.08% for VTI, so QVAL leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (12 years), QVAL annualized +8.58% vs +12.54% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, QVAL or VTI?
QVAL has been the more volatile fund at 21.1% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: QVAL -53.3% vs VTI -35.0%.
Should I hold both QVAL and VTI?
QVAL and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.84, 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 QVAL and VTI?
98.0% of QVAL's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 3.8% of VTI's is in holdings QVAL also owns. They hold 61 positions in common, counted across the 63 positions we hold weights for in QVAL and 3,463 in VTI.
Which pays a higher dividend, QVAL or VTI?
QVAL yields 1.35% while VTI yields 1.03%, so QVAL currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than QVAL?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. QVAL led over 1Y and 5Y, VTI over 3Y and the full window. QVAL is less concentrated, with 20.3% 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.