VCIT vs XLV
Vanguard Intermediate Term Corporate Bond ETF vs State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF
Quick Verdict
VCIT has a lower expense ratio. XLV delivered stronger 1-year returns. VCIT offers more diversification with 2,253 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | VCIT | XLV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.08% | |
| AUM | $67.3B | $42.1B | |
| Dividend Yield | 4.77% | 1.60% | |
| Holdings | 2,253 | 62 | |
| YTD Return | -0.37% | +9.20% | |
| 1Y Return | +2.11% | +28.53% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +6.17% | +9.18% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +0.77% | +6.43% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 6.0% | 14.2% | |
| Max Drawdown | -20.7% | -40.6% | |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Nov 19, 2009 | Dec 16, 1998 |
VCIT vs XLV Performance
Vanguard Intermediate Term Corporate Bond ETF (VCIT) is a ETF from Vanguard (US) and State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLV) is a ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors. Over the past year VCIT returned +2.11% while XLV returned +28.53%. Year to date, VCIT is down 0.37% versus a gain of 9.20% for XLV.
Over three years, VCIT compounded at +6.17% per year against +9.18% for XLV; over five years the annualized figures are +0.77% and +6.43% respectively. Across the full 17-year window we track, XLV has the edge at +7.48% annualized vs +1.75%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
XLV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.2% compared with 6.0% for VCIT. 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 -20.7% for VCIT and -40.6% for XLV. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.36. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
VCIT 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, VCIT currently yields 4.77% against 1.60% for XLV.
Holdings Overlap
VCIT and XLV share 0 holdings out of 2079 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, VCIT or XLV?
VCIT has an expense ratio of 0.03% while XLV charges 0.08%. VCIT is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $5 per year of difference.
Which performed better, VCIT or XLV?
Over the past year VCIT returned +2.11% vs +28.53% for XLV, so XLV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (17 years), VCIT annualized +1.75% vs +7.48% for XLV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, VCIT or XLV?
XLV has been the more volatile fund at 14.2% annualized versus 6.0% for VCIT. Worst drawdown: VCIT -20.7% vs XLV -40.6%.
Should I hold both VCIT and XLV?
VCIT and XLV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.36, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between VCIT and XLV?
VCIT and XLV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2079 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, VCIT or XLV?
VCIT yields 4.77% while XLV yields 1.60%, so VCIT currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.