VERS vs VOO
VERS vs VOO
ProShares Metaverse ETF vs Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
VOO has a lower expense ratio. VERS delivered stronger 1-year returns. VOO offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | VERS | VOO | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.58% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $6M | $979.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.12% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 41 | 509 | |
| YTD Return | +17.50% | +13.80% | |
| 1Y Return | +35.76% | +23.71% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +23.78% | +21.50% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +13.44% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 31.3% | 14.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -42.1% | -34.3% | |
| Fund Family | ProShares | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Alternative | Equity | |
| Inception | Mar 15, 2022 | Sep 7, 2010 |
VERS vs VOO Performance
ProShares Metaverse ETF (VERS) is a ETF from ProShares and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year VERS returned +35.76% while VOO returned +23.71%. Year to date, VERS is up 17.50% versus a gain of 13.80% for VOO.
Over three years, VERS compounded at +23.78% per year against +21.50% for VOO. Across the full 4-year window we track, VOO has the edge at +13.58% annualized vs +13.43%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VERS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 31.3% compared with 14.1% 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 -42.1% for VERS and -34.3% for VOO. 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 0.82. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
VERS charges 0.58% per year while VOO charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $58 vs $3 annually, a gap of $55 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, VERS currently yields 0.12% against 1.09% for VOO.
Holdings Overlap
VERS and VOO share 14 holdings out of 531 unique holdings combined, representing a 25.2% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in VERS | Weight in VOO | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDA | 4.47% | 7.51% | 3.04% |
| AAPL | 4.98% | 6.59% | 1.61% |
| MSFT | 3.84% | 4.30% | 0.46% |
| AMZN | Pro | Pro | Pro |
| GOOGL | Pro | Pro | Pro |
| META | Pro | Pro | Pro |
| MU | Pro | Pro | Pro |
| SNDK | Pro | Pro | Pro |
| QCOM | Pro | Pro | Pro |
| EA | Pro | Pro | Pro |
See all 10 holdings VERS shares with VOO Exact weights in each fund and the difference, for every overlapping position. X-ray my whole portfolio$99/yr Pro · 7-day refund | |||
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, VERS or VOO?
VERS has an expense ratio of 0.58% while VOO charges 0.03%. VOO is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $55 per year of difference.
Which performed better, VERS or VOO?
Over the past year VERS returned +35.76% vs +23.71% for VOO, so VERS leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), VERS annualized +13.43% vs +13.58% for VOO. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, VERS or VOO?
VERS has been the more volatile fund at 31.3% annualized versus 14.1% for VOO. Worst drawdown: VERS -42.1% vs VOO -34.3%.
Should I hold both VERS and VOO?
VERS and VOO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.82, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between VERS and VOO?
VERS and VOO share 14 common holdings with a 25.2% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 531 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, VERS or VOO?
VERS yields 0.12% while VOO yields 1.09%, so VOO 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.