SPY vs VFMV
State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust vs Vanguard US Minimum Volatility ETF
Which is better, SPY or VFMV?
Large Cap Blend against Mid Cap Blend.
SPY has a lower expense ratio. SPY led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. VFMV is less concentrated, with 15.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.0%.
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 | SPY | VFMV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.09%Best | 0.13% |
| AUM | $814.4B | $437M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.01% | 1.75% |
| Holdings | 505 | 204 |
| YTD Return | +13.34%Best | +11.16% |
| 1Y Return | +19.97%Best | +11.05% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.20%Best | +15.04% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.81%Best | +9.00% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.4% | 13.2%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -34.1% | -33.6%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,270Best | $15,386 |
| Top 10 Weight | 38.0% | 15.6%Best |
| Fund Family | State Street Investment Management | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Mid Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jan 22, 1993 | Feb 13, 2018 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 15, 2018 to Sep 4, 2026 (8.6 years).
SPY vs VFMV 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 8.6 years both funds cover.
SPY vs VFMV Performance
State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY) is an ETF from State Street Investment Management and Vanguard US Minimum Volatility ETF (VFMV) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year SPY returned +19.97% while VFMV returned +11.05%. Year to date, SPY is up 13.34% versus a gain of 11.16% for VFMV.
Over three years, SPY compounded at +21.20% per year against +15.04% for VFMV; over five years the annualized figures are +12.81% and +9.00% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, SPY has the edge at +13.88% annualized vs +9.76%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SPY has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.4% compared with 13.2% for VFMV. 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 -34.1% for SPY and -33.6% for VFMV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.88. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
SPY charges 0.09% per year while VFMV charges 0.13%. On a $10,000 position that is $9 vs $13 annually, a gap of $4 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, SPY currently yields 1.01% against 1.75% for VFMV.
Holdings Overlap
58.9% of SPY's money is in holdings VFMV also owns. 73.3% of VFMV's money is in holdings SPY also owns.
Most of VFMV is already inside SPY. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
119 positions in common, counted across the 503 positions we hold weights for in SPY and 201 in VFMV, against full books of 505 and 204.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 81 positions for VFMV that do not appear in our book for SPY (26.2% of the fund), and 374 for SPY that do not appear in VFMV (40.5%).
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 SPY | Weight in VFMV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp. | 7.71% | 1.37% | 6.34% |
| AAPLApple Inc Ord | 6.83% | 1.66% | 5.17% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp 4.100 Feb 06 37 | 5.50% | 1.28% | 4.22% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.08% | 0.05% | 4.03% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.97% | 0.81% | 2.16% |
| GOOGAlphabet, Inc., Class C | 2.67% | 1.08% | 1.59% |
| GOOGL Alphabet Inc. Class A | 3.33% | 0.09% | 3.24% |
| METAMeta Platform Inc | 1.94% | 1.08% | 0.86% |
| BRK.BBerkshire Hathaway, Inc., Class B | 1.42% | 1.36% | 0.06% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 0.92% | 1.71% | 0.79% |
73.3% of VFMV is already inside SPY.
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, SPY or VFMV?
SPY has an expense ratio of 0.09% while VFMV charges 0.13%. SPY is the cheaper option, by $4 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, SPY or VFMV?
Over the past year SPY returned +19.97% vs +11.05% for VFMV, so SPY leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), SPY annualized +13.88% vs +9.76% for VFMV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, SPY or VFMV?
SPY has been the more volatile fund at 16.4% annualized versus 13.2% for VFMV. Worst drawdown: SPY -34.1% vs VFMV -33.6%.
Should I hold both SPY and VFMV?
SPY and VFMV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.88, 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 SPY and VFMV?
73.3% of VFMV's money is in holdings SPY also owns. 73.3% of VFMV's is in holdings SPY also owns. They hold 119 positions in common, counted across the 503 positions we hold weights for in SPY and 201 in VFMV.
Which pays a higher dividend, SPY or VFMV?
SPY yields 1.01% while VFMV yields 1.75%, so VFMV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VFMV better than SPY?
SPY has a lower expense ratio. SPY led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. VFMV is less concentrated, with 15.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.