USNZ vs VOO
Xtrackers Net Zero Pathway Paris Aligned US Equity ETF vs Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, USNZ or VOO?
Nearly the same fund. VOO costs less.
VOO has a lower expense ratio. VOO led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.99. VOO is less concentrated, with 36.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.1%.
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 | USNZ | VOO |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.10% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $297M | $997.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.93% | 1.04% |
| Holdings | 310 | 509 |
| YTD Return | +11.69%Best | +11.55% |
| 1Y Return | +17.47% | +17.54%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.07% | +20.71%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.80% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.3% | 14.7%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -19.2% | -18.7%Best |
| $10,000 over 4.2 years | $20,610 | $21,080Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 44.1% | 36.4%Best |
| Fund Family | Xtrackers ETFs | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jun 27, 2022 | Sep 7, 2010 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 4.2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 28, 2022 to Sep 10, 2026 (4.2 years).
USNZ 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 4.2 years both funds cover.
USNZ vs VOO Performance
Xtrackers Net Zero Pathway Paris Aligned US Equity ETF (USNZ) is an ETF from Xtrackers ETFs and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year USNZ returned +17.47% while VOO returned +17.54%. Year to date, USNZ is up 11.69% versus a gain of 11.55% for VOO.
Over three years, USNZ compounded at +20.07% per year against +20.71% for VOO. Across the full 4-year window we track, VOO has the edge at +19.43% annualized vs +18.79%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
USNZ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.3% compared with 14.7% 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 -19.2% for USNZ and -18.7% 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 0.99. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
USNZ charges 0.10% per year while VOO charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $10 vs $3 annually, a gap of $7 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, USNZ currently yields 0.93% against 1.04% for VOO.
Holdings Overlap
97.3% of USNZ's money is in holdings VOO also owns. 78.5% of VOO's money is in holdings USNZ also owns.
Most of USNZ is already inside VOO. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
270 positions in common, counted across the 298 positions we hold weights for in USNZ and 505 in VOO, against full books of 310 and 509.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 227 positions for VOO that do not appear in our book for USNZ (21.0% of the fund), and 23 for USNZ that do not appear in VOO (2.1%).
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 USNZ | Weight in VOO | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp. | 9.94% | 7.51% | 2.43% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 8.27% | 6.59% | 1.68% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp 4.100 Feb 06 37 | 6.63% | 4.30% | 2.33% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.96% | 3.62% | 0.34% |
| GOOGLAlphabet A Usd 0.001 | 3.58% | 3.25% | 0.33% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.18% | 2.77% | 0.41% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc | 3.02% | 2.59% | 0.43% |
| METAMeta Platforms, Inc. | 2.12% | 1.92% | 0.20% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.76% | 2.02% | 0.26% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 1.68% | 1.84% | 0.16% |
97.3% of USNZ is already inside VOO.
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, USNZ or VOO?
USNZ has an expense ratio of 0.10% while VOO charges 0.03%. VOO is the cheaper option, by $7 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, USNZ or VOO?
Over the past year USNZ returned +17.47% vs +17.54% for VOO, so VOO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), USNZ annualized +18.79% vs +19.43% for VOO. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, USNZ or VOO?
USNZ has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 14.7% for VOO. Worst drawdown: USNZ -19.2% vs VOO -18.7%.
Should I hold both USNZ and VOO?
USNZ and VOO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.99, 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 USNZ and VOO?
97.3% of USNZ's money is in holdings VOO also owns. 78.5% of VOO's is in holdings USNZ also owns. They hold 270 positions in common, counted across the 298 positions we hold weights for in USNZ and 505 in VOO.
Which pays a higher dividend, USNZ or VOO?
USNZ yields 0.93% while VOO yields 1.04%, so VOO currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VOO better than USNZ?
VOO has a lower expense ratio. VOO led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.99. VOO is less concentrated, with 36.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.1%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.