VOO vs VOT
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF
Which is better, VOO or VOT?
Large Cap Blend against Mid Cap Growth.
VOO has a lower expense ratio. VOO led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. VOT is less concentrated, with 20.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.6%.
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 | VOO | VOT |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.05% |
| AUM | $1.0T | $19.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.04% | 0.60% |
| Holdings | 506 | 126 |
| YTD Return | +12.75%Best | +5.34% |
| 1Y Return | +15.60%Best | +1.00% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.95%Best | +15.93% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.55%Best | +5.01% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.1%Best | 17.0% |
| Max Drawdown | -34.3%Best | -37.2% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,877Best | $12,769 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.6% | 20.9%Best |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Mid Cap Growth |
| Inception | Sep 7, 2010 | Aug 17, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 9, 2010 to Oct 1, 2026 (16.1 years).
VOO vs VOT 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 16.1 years both funds cover.
VOO vs VOT Performance
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) is an ETF from Vanguard (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Mid-Cap Growth ETF (VOT) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year VOO returned +15.60% while VOT returned +1.00%. Year to date, VOO is up 12.75% versus a gain of 5.34% for VOT.
Over three years, VOO compounded at +22.95% per year against +15.93% for VOT; over five years the annualized figures are +13.55% and +5.01% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, VOO has the edge at +13.38% annualized vs +11.75%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VOT has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.0% 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 -34.3% for VOO and -37.2% for VOT. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.92. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
VOO charges 0.03% per year while VOT charges 0.05%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $5 annually, a gap of $2 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, VOO currently yields 1.04% against 0.60% for VOT.
Holdings Overlap
6.7% of VOO's money is in holdings VOT also owns. 83.6% of VOT's money is in holdings VOO also owns.
Most of VOT is already inside VOO. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
93 positions in common, counted across the 494 positions we hold weights for in VOO and 123 in VOT, against full books of 506 and 126.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 28 positions for VOT that do not appear in our book for VOO (15.2% of the fund), and 396 for VOO that do not appear in VOT (92.6%).
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 VOO | Weight in VOT | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| HWMHowmet Aerospace Inc. | 0.18% | 2.57% | 2.39% |
| STXSeagate Technolo | 0.30% | 2.18% | 1.88% |
| PWRQuanta Services Inc | 0.16% | 2.28% | 2.12% |
| WDCWestern Digital Corp. | 0.29% | 2.14% | 1.85% |
| VRTVertiv Co. | 0.14% | 2.11% | 1.97% |
| DDOGDatadog Inc | 0.14% | 2.02% | 1.88% |
| CEGConstellation Energy Corporation Com | 0.13% | 1.94% | 1.81% |
| ROSTRoss Stores, Inc. | 0.13% | 1.84% | 1.71% |
| RCLRoyal Caribbean Cruises | 0.12% | 1.75% | 1.63% |
| DASHDoordash Inc - A | 0.12% | 1.65% | 1.53% |
83.6% of VOT 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, VOO or VOT?
VOO has an expense ratio of 0.03% while VOT charges 0.05%. VOO is the cheaper option, by $2 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, VOO or VOT?
Over the past year VOO returned +15.60% vs +1.00% for VOT, so VOO leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), VOO annualized +13.38% vs +11.75% for VOT. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, VOO or VOT?
VOT has been the more volatile fund at 17.0% annualized versus 14.1% for VOO. Worst drawdown: VOO -34.3% vs VOT -37.2%.
Should I hold both VOO and VOT?
VOO and VOT have a monthly-return correlation of 0.92, 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 VOO and VOT?
83.6% of VOT's money is in holdings VOO also owns. 83.6% of VOT's is in holdings VOO also owns. They hold 93 positions in common, counted across the 494 positions we hold weights for in VOO and 123 in VOT.
Which pays a higher dividend, VOO or VOT?
VOO yields 1.04% while VOT yields 0.60%, so VOO currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VOT better than VOO?
VOO has a lower expense ratio. VOO led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. VOT is less concentrated, with 20.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.