VONG vs XLV
Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF vs State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF
Quick Verdict
VONG has a lower expense ratio. XLV delivered stronger 1-year returns. VONG offers more diversification with 373 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | VONG | XLV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.06% | 0.08% | |
| AUM | $51.6B | $43.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.48% | 1.56% | |
| Holdings | 373 | 63 | |
| YTD Return | +4.01% | +13.25% | |
| 1Y Return | +12.19% | +29.65% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.47% | +11.30% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.11% | +6.83% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.9% | 14.2% | |
| Max Drawdown | -32.7% | -40.6% | |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Sep 20, 2010 | Dec 16, 1998 |
VONG vs XLV Performance
Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF (VONG) 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 VONG returned +12.19% while XLV returned +29.65%. Year to date, VONG is up 4.01% versus a gain of 13.25% for XLV.
Over three years, VONG compounded at +22.47% per year against +11.30% for XLV; over five years the annualized figures are +12.11% and +6.83% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, VONG has the edge at +15.63% annualized vs +7.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VONG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.9% compared with 14.2% 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 -32.7% for VONG 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 0.62. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
VONG charges 0.06% per year while XLV charges 0.08%. On a $10,000 position that is $6 vs $8 annually, a gap of $2 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, VONG currently yields 0.48% against 1.56% for XLV.
Holdings Overlap
VONG and XLV share 12 holdings out of 419 unique holdings combined, representing a 4.5% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, VONG or XLV?
VONG has an expense ratio of 0.06% while XLV charges 0.08%. VONG is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $2 per year of difference.
Which performed better, VONG or XLV?
Over the past year VONG returned +12.19% vs +29.65% for XLV, so XLV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), VONG annualized +15.63% vs +7.62% for XLV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, VONG or XLV?
VONG has been the more volatile fund at 15.9% annualized versus 14.2% for XLV. Worst drawdown: VONG -32.7% vs XLV -40.6%.
Should I hold both VONG and XLV?
VONG and XLV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.62, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between VONG and XLV?
VONG and XLV share 12 common holdings with a 4.5% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 419 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, VONG or XLV?
VONG yields 0.48% while XLV yields 1.56%, so XLV 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.