RFG vs VTI

RFG vs VTI

Which is better, RFG or VTI?

Mid Cap Growth against Large Cap Blend.

VTI has a lower expense ratio. RFG led over 1Y, VTI over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90.

Lower Fees: VTIHigher Returns: split

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

MetricRFGVTI
Expense Ratio0.35%0.03%Best
AUM$339M$666.9B
Dividend Yield0.15%1.03%
Holdings1003,543
YTD Return+11.45%+11.65%Best
1Y Return+17.48%Best+17.34%
3Y Return (annualized)+14.50%+20.35%Best
5Y Return (annualized)+6.11%+11.72%Best
Volatility (annualized)19.6%15.6%Best
Max Drawdown-52.0%Best-56.6%
$10,000 over 5 years$13,452$17,404Best
Fund FamilyInvesco (US)Vanguard (US)
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleMid Cap GrowthLarge Cap Blend
InceptionMar 1, 2006May 24, 2001

Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.

Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Mar 7, 2006 to Sep 10, 2026 (20.5 years).

RFG 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 20.5 years both funds cover.

RFG vs VTI Performance

Invesco S&P Midcap 400 Pure Growth ETF (RFG) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year RFG returned +17.48% while VTI returned +17.34%. Year to date, RFG is up 11.45% versus a gain of 11.65% for VTI.

Over three years, RFG compounded at +14.50% per year against +20.35% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +6.11% and +11.72% respectively. Across the full 21-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +9.43% annualized vs +9.13%.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns

RFG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.6% compared with 15.6% 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 -52.0% for RFG and -56.6% 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 0.90. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.

Fees and Cost Over Time

RFG charges 0.35% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $35 vs $3 annually, a gap of $32 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, RFG currently yields 0.15% against 1.03% for VTI.

Holdings Overlap

RFG already in VTI79.2%

At least 79.2% of RFG's money is in holdings VTI also owns.

Stated as a floor: for VTI, our book for it covers 90.6% of that fund, so a holding it does not list is one we cannot count as shared. The real figure is this or higher.

Most of RFG is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.

79 positions in common, counted across the 101 positions we hold weights for in RFG and 2,787 in VTI, against full books of 100 and 3,543.

Top Shared Holdings

StockWeight in RFGWeight in VTIDifference
CRSCarpenter Technology Corp2.38%0.04%2.34%
0RMV:LNTechnipfmc Plc2.06%0.04%2.02%
STRLSterling Construction Co Inc2.03%0.03%2.00%
HALOHalozyme Therapeutics Inc2.03%0.01%2.02%
DOCNDigitalocean Holdings Inc2.01%0.02%1.99%
WWDWoodward Inc1.84%0.03%1.81%
ATIAti Inc1.77%0.04%1.73%
MEDPMedpace Holdings Inc1.73%0.02%1.71%
IESCIes Holdings1.62%0.00%1.62%
VALValaris Limited Common Shares1.62%0.00%1.62%

79.2% of RFG 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.

RFGVTI

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, RFG or VTI?

RFG has an expense ratio of 0.35% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $32 a year on a $10,000 investment.

Which performed better, RFG or VTI?

Over the past year RFG returned +17.48% vs +17.34% for VTI, so RFG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (21 years), RFG annualized +9.13% vs +9.43% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which is riskier, RFG or VTI?

RFG has been the more volatile fund at 19.6% annualized versus 15.6% for VTI. Worst drawdown: RFG -52.0% vs VTI -56.6%.

Should I hold both RFG and VTI?

RFG and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.90, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.

What is the holdings overlap between RFG and VTI?

At least 79.2% of RFG's money is in holdings VTI also owns. Our book for VTI is partial, so the real figure is this or higher. They hold 79 positions in common, counted across the 101 positions we hold weights for in RFG and 2,787 in VTI.

Which pays a higher dividend, RFG or VTI?

RFG yields 0.15% while VTI yields 1.03%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is VTI better than RFG?

VTI has a lower expense ratio. RFG led over 1Y, VTI over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.