VOO vs WBIF
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF vs WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF
Quick Verdict
VOO has a lower expense ratio. WBIF delivered stronger 1-year returns. VOO offers more diversification with 509 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | VOO | WBIF | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 1.65% | |
| AUM | $997.4B | $24M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.08% | 0.06% | |
| Holdings | 509 | 70 | |
| YTD Return | +12.25% | +18.14% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.92% | +24.08% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.79% | +10.30% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.05% | +3.99% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.1% | 12.0% | |
| Max Drawdown | -34.3% | -20.3% | |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | WBI Investments | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Sep 7, 2010 | Aug 25, 2014 |
VOO vs WBIF Performance
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) is a ETF from Vanguard (US) and WBI BullBear Value 3000 ETF (WBIF) is a ETF from WBI Investments. Over the past year VOO returned +20.92% while WBIF returned +24.08%. Year to date, VOO is up 12.25% versus a gain of 18.14% for WBIF.
Over three years, VOO compounded at +21.79% per year against +10.30% for WBIF; over five years the annualized figures are +13.05% and +3.99% respectively. Across the full 12-year window we track, VOO has the edge at +13.45% annualized vs +4.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VOO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.1% compared with 12.0% for WBIF. 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 -20.3% for WBIF. 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 0.73. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
VOO charges 0.03% per year while WBIF charges 1.65%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $165 annually, a gap of $162 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, VOO currently yields 1.08% against 0.06% for WBIF.
Holdings Overlap
VOO and WBIF share 40 holdings out of 534 unique holdings combined, representing a 5.5% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, VOO or WBIF?
VOO has an expense ratio of 0.03% while WBIF charges 1.65%. VOO is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $162 per year of difference.
Which performed better, VOO or WBIF?
Over the past year VOO returned +20.92% vs +24.08% for WBIF, so WBIF leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (12 years), VOO annualized +13.45% vs +4.19% for WBIF. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, VOO or WBIF?
VOO has been the more volatile fund at 14.1% annualized versus 12.0% for WBIF. Worst drawdown: VOO -34.3% vs WBIF -20.3%.
Should I hold both VOO and WBIF?
VOO and WBIF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.73, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between VOO and WBIF?
VOO and WBIF share 40 common holdings with a 5.5% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 534 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, VOO or WBIF?
VOO yields 1.08% while WBIF yields 0.06%, 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.