SGOL vs VOO

SGOL vs VOO

Which is better, SGOL or VOO?

Gold against Large Cap Blend.

VOO has a lower expense ratio. SGOL led over 3Y and 5Y, VOO over 1Y and the full window.

Lower Fees: VOOHigher 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

MetricSGOLVOO
Expense Ratio0.17%0.03%Best
AUM$7.4B$997.4B
Dividend Yield0.00%1.04%
Holdings1509
YTD Return-1.48%+13.21%Best
1Y Return+14.34%+17.37%Best
3Y Return (annualized)+30.48%Best+22.66%
5Y Return (annualized)+19.40%Best+13.14%
Volatility (annualized)16.6%14.1%Best
Max Drawdown-45.5%-34.3%Best
$10,000 over 5 years$24,267Best$18,539
Fund FamilyAberdeenVanguard (US)
CategoryCommodityEquity
StyleGoldLarge Cap Blend
InceptionSep 9, 2009Sep 7, 2010

Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.

Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 9, 2010 to Sep 24, 2026 (16 years).

SGOL vs VOO 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 16 years both funds cover.

SGOL vs VOO Performance

abrdn Physical Gold Shares ETF (SGOL) is an ETF from Aberdeen and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year SGOL returned +14.34% while VOO returned +17.37%. Year to date, SGOL is down 1.48% versus a gain of 13.21% for VOO.

Over three years, SGOL compounded at +30.48% per year against +22.66% for VOO; over five years the annualized figures are +19.40% and +13.14% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, VOO has the edge at +13.42% annualized vs +7.69%.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns

SGOL has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.6% compared with 14.1% for VOO. 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 -45.5% for SGOL and -34.3% for VOO. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.

The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.12. They move largely independently of each other.

Fees and Cost Over Time

SGOL charges 0.17% per year while VOO charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $17 vs $3 annually, a gap of $14 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, SGOL currently yields 0.00% against 1.04% for VOO.

You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.

Whichever of SGOL and VOO you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.

SGOLVOO

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, SGOL or VOO?

SGOL has an expense ratio of 0.17% while VOO charges 0.03%. VOO is the cheaper option, by $14 a year on a $10,000 investment.

Which performed better, SGOL or VOO?

Over the past year SGOL returned +14.34% vs +17.37% for VOO, so VOO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), SGOL annualized +7.69% vs +13.42% for VOO. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which is riskier, SGOL or VOO?

SGOL has been the more volatile fund at 16.6% annualized versus 14.1% for VOO. Worst drawdown: SGOL -45.5% vs VOO -34.3%.

Should I hold both SGOL and VOO?

SGOL and VOO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.12, 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, SGOL or VOO?

SGOL yields 0.00% while VOO yields 1.04%, so VOO currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is VOO better than SGOL?

VOO has a lower expense ratio. SGOL led over 3Y and 5Y, VOO over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.