TSIC vs VTI
Truth Social American Icons ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, TSIC or VTI?
VTI costs less.
VTI has a lower expense ratio.
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 | TSIC | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.65% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $2M | $666.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.82% | 1.07% |
| Holdings | 54 | 3,543 |
| YTD Return | +1.94% | +13.59%Best |
| 1Y Return | - | +20.00% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +20.95% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +11.81% |
| Fund Family | Truth Social Funds | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Dec 30, 2025 | May 24, 2001 |
Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window, Top 10 Weight.
TSIC 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
TSIC vs VTI Performance
Truth Social American Icons ETF (TSIC) is an ETF from Truth Social Funds and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Year to date, TSIC is up 1.94% versus a gain of 13.59% for VTI.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
TSIC charges 0.65% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $65 vs $3 annually, a gap of $62 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, TSIC currently yields 0.82% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
At least 99.3% of TSIC's money is in holdings VTI also owns.
Stated as a floor: for VTI, our book for it covers 92.3% 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 TSIC is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
The two holdings books were reported 49 days apart, TSIC as of Aug 18, 2026 and VTI as of Jun 30, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
51 positions in common, counted across the 52 positions we hold weights for in TSIC and 2,787 in VTI, against full books of 54 and 3,543.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in TSIC | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| COSTCostco Wholesale Corp. | 7.82% | 0.57% | 7.25% |
| HDHome Depot Inc/The | 7.82% | 0.48% | 7.34% |
| KOCoca Cola Co. | 6.87% | 0.38% | 6.49% |
| NFLXNetflix, Inc. | 6.60% | 0.41% | 6.19% |
| WMTWalmart, Inc. | 5.70% | 0.68% | 5.02% |
| PEPPepsico Inc. | 5.31% | 0.25% | 5.06% |
| UBERUber Technologies Inc | 4.66% | 0.20% | 4.46% |
| PGProcter & Gamble Company | 4.31% | 0.47% | 3.84% |
| MCDMcdonald'S Corp | 4.00% | 0.26% | 3.74% |
| MOAltria Group Inc | 3.99% | 0.17% | 3.82% |
99.3% of TSIC 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, TSIC or VTI?
TSIC has an expense ratio of 0.65% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $62 a year on a $10,000 investment.
What is the holdings overlap between TSIC and VTI?
At least 99.3% of TSIC's money is in holdings VTI also owns. Our book for VTI is partial, so the real figure is this or higher. They hold 51 positions in common, counted across the 52 positions we hold weights for in TSIC and 2,787 in VTI.
Which pays a higher dividend, TSIC or VTI?
TSIC yields 0.82% while VTI yields 1.07%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than TSIC?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.