VT vs XLF
Vanguard Total World Stock ETF vs State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF
Which is better, VT or XLF?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Value.
VT has a lower expense ratio. VT led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window.
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 | VT | XLF |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.06%Best | 0.08% |
| AUM | $97.9B | $54.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.55% | 1.40% |
| Holdings | 10,133 | 80 |
| YTD Return | +12.24%Best | +2.58% |
| 1Y Return | +17.11%Best | +4.80% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.23%Best | +18.87% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.20%Best | +10.67% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.6%Best | 22.7% |
| Max Drawdown | -50.6%Best | -72.6% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,003Best | $16,602 |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | SPDR State Street Global Advisors |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Jun 24, 2008 | Dec 16, 1998 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 26, 2008 to Sep 18, 2026 (18.2 years).
VT vs XLF 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 18.2 years both funds cover.
VT vs XLF Performance
Vanguard Total World Stock ETF (VT) is an ETF from Vanguard (US) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) is an ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors. Over the past year VT returned +17.11% while XLF returned +4.80%. Year to date, VT is up 12.24% versus a gain of 2.58% for XLF.
Over three years, VT compounded at +20.23% per year against +18.87% for XLF; over five years the annualized figures are +11.20% and +10.67% respectively. Across the full 18-year window we track, VT has the edge at +7.22% annualized vs +6.09%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
XLF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 22.7% compared with 16.6% for VT. 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 -50.6% for VT and -72.6% for XLF. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
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
VT charges 0.06% per year while XLF 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, VT currently yields 1.55% against 1.40% for XLF.
Holdings Overlap
At least 91.9% of XLF's money is in holdings VT also owns.
Stated as a floor: for VT, our book for it covers 90.1% of that fund, so a holding it does not list is one we cannot count as shared. The real figure is this or higher.
Most of XLF is already inside VT. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
67 positions in common, counted across the 9,272 positions we hold weights for in VT and 77 in XLF, against full books of 10,133 and 80.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in VT | Weight in XLF | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| JPMJpmorgan Chase | 0.81% | 11.78% | 10.97% |
| BRK.BBerkshire Hathaway Inc Brk/B Us Equity | 0.72% | 11.41% | 10.69% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 0.52% | 7.66% | 7.14% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 0.40% | 5.81% | 5.41% |
| GSGoldman Sachs Group Inc/The | 0.24% | 3.66% | 3.42% |
| WFCWells Fargo & Co. | 0.23% | 3.30% | 3.07% |
| MSMorgan Stanley | 0.20% | 3.13% | 2.93% |
| CCitigroup Inc. | 0.19% | 2.80% | 2.61% |
| SCHWSchwab Strategic T | 0.15% | 2.19% | 2.04% |
| AXPAmerican Express Co. | 0.15% | 2.14% | 1.99% |
91.9% of XLF is already inside VT.
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, VT or XLF?
VT has an expense ratio of 0.06% while XLF charges 0.08%. VT is the cheaper option, by $2 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, VT or XLF?
Over the past year VT returned +17.11% vs +4.80% for XLF, so VT leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (18 years), VT annualized +7.22% vs +6.09% for XLF. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, VT or XLF?
XLF has been the more volatile fund at 22.7% annualized versus 16.6% for VT. Worst drawdown: VT -50.6% vs XLF -72.6%.
Should I hold both VT and XLF?
VT and XLF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.82, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between VT and XLF?
At least 91.9% of XLF's money is in holdings VT also owns. Our book for VT is partial, so the real figure is this or higher. They hold 67 positions in common, counted across the 9,272 positions we hold weights for in VT and 77 in XLF.
Which pays a higher dividend, VT or XLF?
VT yields 1.55% while XLF yields 1.40%, so VT currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is XLF better than VT?
VT has a lower expense ratio. VT led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.