REGL vs VTI
ProShares S&P MidCap 400 Dividend Aristocrats ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, REGL or VTI?
Mid Cap Blend against Large Cap Blend.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. REGL is less concentrated, with 17.1% 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 | REGL | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.40% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $1.7B | $690.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 2.19% | 1.03% |
| Holdings | 66 | 3,524 |
| YTD Return | +3.50% | +13.35%Best |
| 1Y Return | +3.13% | +15.92%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +12.33% | +23.41%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.04% | +12.83%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.0%Best | 15.4% |
| Max Drawdown | -36.4% | -35.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $14,052 | $18,286Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 17.1%Best | 33.3% |
| Fund Family | ProShares | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Feb 3, 2015 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 5, 2015 to Oct 2, 2026 (11.7 years).
REGL 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 11.7 years both funds cover.
REGL vs VTI Performance
ProShares S&P MidCap 400 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (REGL) is an ETF from ProShares and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year REGL returned +3.13% while VTI returned +15.92%. Year to date, REGL is up 3.50% versus a gain of 13.35% for VTI.
Over three years, REGL compounded at +12.33% per year against +23.41% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +7.04% and +12.83% respectively. Across the full 12-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +12.23% annualized vs +9.08%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.4% compared with 15.0% for REGL. 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 -36.4% for REGL 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 0.82. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
REGL charges 0.40% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $40 vs $3 annually, a gap of $37 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, REGL currently yields 2.19% against 1.03% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
99.8% of REGL's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 0.8% of VTI's money is in holdings REGL also owns.
Most of REGL is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
65 positions in common, counted across the 65 positions we hold weights for in REGL and 3,463 in VTI, against full books of 66 and 3,524.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,090 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for REGL (96.7% of the fund), and 0 for REGL 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 REGL | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| RGLDRoyal Gold Inc | 1.95% | 0.02% | 1.93% |
| AVNTAvient Corp | 1.74% | 0.00% | 1.74% |
| THGHanover Insurance Group Inc | 1.72% | 0.01% | 1.71% |
| UNMUnum Group | 1.71% | 0.02% | 1.69% |
| SEICSei Investments Co. | 1.69% | 0.02% | 1.67% |
| WTRGEssential Utilities Inc - Common | 1.67% | 0.02% | 1.65% |
| RGAReinsurance Group of America, Incorporated | 1.67% | 0.02% | 1.65% |
| LADLithia Motors Inc | 1.67% | 0.01% | 1.66% |
| MSAMsa Safety Inc | 1.66% | 0.01% | 1.65% |
| SCIService Corp International | 1.65% | 0.02% | 1.63% |
99.8% of REGL 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, REGL or VTI?
REGL has an expense ratio of 0.40% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $37 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, REGL or VTI?
Over the past year REGL returned +3.13% vs +15.92% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (12 years), REGL annualized +9.08% vs +12.23% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, REGL or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.4% annualized versus 15.0% for REGL. Worst drawdown: REGL -36.4% vs VTI -35.0%.
Should I hold both REGL and VTI?
REGL and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.82, 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 REGL and VTI?
99.8% of REGL's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 0.8% of VTI's is in holdings REGL also owns. They hold 65 positions in common, counted across the 65 positions we hold weights for in REGL and 3,463 in VTI.
Which pays a higher dividend, REGL or VTI?
REGL yields 2.19% while VTI yields 1.03%, so REGL currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than REGL?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. REGL is less concentrated, with 17.1% 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.