VB vs XLV
Vanguard Morningstar Small-Cap ETF vs State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF
Which is better, VB or XLV?
Small Cap Blend against Large Cap Blend.
VB has a lower expense ratio. VB led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, XLV over 1Y. VB is less concentrated, with 4.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 60.7%.
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 | VB | XLV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.08% |
| AUM | $79.7B | $44.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.21% | 1.49% |
| Holdings | 1,319 | 63 |
| YTD Return | +11.98%Best | +9.48% |
| 1Y Return | +15.45% | +25.19%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.91%Best | +10.39% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.03%Best | +6.60% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.9% | 13.7%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -61.0% | -40.6%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $14,045Best | $13,765 |
| Top 10 Weight | 4.3%Best | 60.7% |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | SPDR State Street Global Advisors |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Small Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jan 26, 2004 | Dec 16, 1998 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jan 30, 2004 to Sep 17, 2026 (22.6 years).
VB vs XLV 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 22.6 years both funds cover.
VB vs XLV Performance
Vanguard Morningstar Small-Cap ETF (VB) is an ETF from Vanguard (US) and State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLV) is an ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors. Over the past year VB returned +15.45% while XLV returned +25.19%. Year to date, VB is up 11.98% versus a gain of 9.48% for XLV.
Over three years, VB compounded at +15.91% per year against +10.39% for XLV; over five years the annualized figures are +7.03% and +6.60% respectively. Across the full 23-year window we track, VB has the edge at +8.57% annualized vs +8.20%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VB has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.9% compared with 13.7% for XLV. 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 -61.0% for VB and -40.6% for XLV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.65. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
VB charges 0.03% per year while XLV charges 0.08%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $8 annually, a gap of $5 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, VB currently yields 1.21% against 1.49% for XLV.
Holdings Overlap
2.3% of VB's money is in holdings XLV also owns. 4.0% of XLV's money is in holdings VB also owns.
XLV and VB share little of their money.
The two holdings books were reported 63 days apart, VB as of Jun 30, 2026 and XLV as of Sep 1, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
15 positions in common, counted across the 1,302 positions we hold weights for in VB and 61 in XLV, against full books of 1,319 and 63.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 44 positions for XLV that do not appear in our book for VB (95.5% of the fund), and 1,230 for VB that do not appear in XLV (91.7%).
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 VB | Weight in XLV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MRNAModerna therapeutics | 0.30% | 0.88% | 0.58% |
| CNCCentene | 0.19% | 0.49% | 0.30% |
| INCYIncyte Corp. | 0.23% | 0.34% | 0.11% |
| VTRSViatris Inc. | 0.22% | 0.31% | 0.09% |
| COOCooper Cos Inc/The | 0.17% | 0.22% | 0.05% |
| RVTYRevvity Inc | 0.15% | 0.23% | 0.08% |
| SOLVSolventum Corp | 0.14% | 0.22% | 0.08% |
| CRLCharles River Laboratories International Inc | 0.13% | 0.22% | 0.09% |
| BAXBaxter International Inc. | 0.13% | 0.21% | 0.08% |
| ALGNAlign Technology Inc. | 0.14% | 0.17% | 0.03% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of VB and XLV you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, VB or XLV?
VB has an expense ratio of 0.03% while XLV charges 0.08%. VB is the cheaper option, by $5 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, VB or XLV?
Over the past year VB returned +15.45% vs +25.19% for XLV, so XLV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (23 years), VB annualized +8.57% vs +8.20% for XLV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, VB or XLV?
VB has been the more volatile fund at 18.9% annualized versus 13.7% for XLV. Worst drawdown: VB -61.0% vs XLV -40.6%.
Should I hold both VB and XLV?
VB and XLV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.65, 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 VB and XLV?
4.0% of XLV's money is in holdings VB also owns. 4.0% of XLV's is in holdings VB also owns. They hold 15 positions in common, counted across the 1,302 positions we hold weights for in VB and 61 in XLV.
Which pays a higher dividend, VB or XLV?
VB yields 1.21% while XLV yields 1.49%, so XLV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is XLV better than VB?
VB has a lower expense ratio. VB led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, XLV over 1Y. VB is less concentrated, with 4.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 60.7%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.