VTBNX vs VV

VTBNX vs VV

Which is better, VTBNX or VV?

Long Term High Quality against Large Cap Blend.

VTBNX has a lower expense ratio.

Lower Fees: VTBNX

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

MetricVTBNXVV
Expense Ratio0.02%Best0.03%
AUM$207.3B$54.3B
Dividend Yield4.16%0.99%
Holdings15,871436
YTD Price Return-5.61%+11.81%
1Y Price Return-5.81%+14.03%
3Y Price Return (annualized)+0.30%+21.66%
5Y Price Return (annualized)-4.02%+11.64%
Volatility (annualized)6.4%Best15.9%
Max Drawdown-20.8%Best-26.5%
Fund FamilyVanguard (US)Vanguard (US)
CategoryFixed IncomeEquity
StyleLong Term High QualityLarge Cap Blend
InceptionFeb 17, 2009Jan 27, 2004

Not shown on this pair: $10,000 over 5 years, Top 10 Weight.

A price return is not the return of a fund that pays its income out. The coupon or distribution never appears in the price, so the return rows carry no winner here. VTBNX currently yields 4.16% and VV 0.99%.

Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 4, 2021 to Sep 30, 2026 (5 years).

Compare VTBNX against instead:VTBNX vs SPYVTBNX vs QQQVTBNX vs VOOVTBNX vs VTIVV against:VV vs VXUS

VTBNX vs VV Performance

Vanguard Total Bond Market II Index Fund Institutional Shares (VTBNX) is a mutual fund from Vanguard (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Large-Cap ETF (VV) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year VTBNX's price moved -5.81% and VV's +14.03%, before the income each one paid out.

Over three years, VTBNX compounded at +0.30% per year against +21.66% for VV; over five years the annualized figures are -4.02% and +11.64% respectively.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns

VV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.9% compared with 6.4% for VTBNX. 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 -20.8% for VTBNX and -26.5% for VV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.

The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.62. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.

Fees and Cost Over Time

VTBNX charges 0.02% per year while VV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $2 vs $3 annually, a gap of $1 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, VTBNX currently yields 4.16% against 0.99% for VV.

Structure and taxes

VTBNX is a mutual fund and VV is an ETF. A mutual fund prices once a day at net asset value and may carry a purchase minimum. An ETF trades through the day at whatever the market pays for it.

In a taxable account the difference that usually matters is distributions. An ETF can meet redemptions in kind, so it rarely has to sell holdings and rarely passes a capital gain to the people who held it; a mutual fund that sells holdings to meet redemptions can distribute a realised gain at year end to everyone still in the fund, whether or not they sold anything themselves. In a tax-deferred account that difference largely disappears. Both are descriptions of how the two wrappers work, not a recommendation.

Tax-loss harvesting works on either wrapper.

Holdings Overlap

VV already in VTBNX1.5%

At least 1.5% of VV's money is in holdings VTBNX also owns.

Stated as a floor: for VTBNX, our book for it covers 61.9% of that fund, so a holding it does not list is one we cannot count as shared. The real figure is this or higher.

VV and VTBNX share little of their money.

11 positions in common, counted across the 12,623 positions we hold weights for in VTBNX and 431 in VV, against full books of 15,871 and 436.

Top Shared Holdings

StockWeight in VTBNXWeight in VVDifference
LRCXLam Research Corp0.00%0.58%0.58%
TAT&T Inc0.00%0.26%0.26%
DUKDuke Energy Corp0.01%0.15%0.14%
TMUST-Mobile Usa Inc Esrw Usd Npv Ref Sm#5855580.04%0.12%0.08%
TRVThe Travelers Cos, Inc.0.00%0.13%0.13%
AONAon Public Limited Company  Cl.  A0.00%0.12%0.12%
KDPKeurig Dr Pepper Inc (kdp Us)0.00%0.06%0.06%
CNPCenterpoint Energy Inc.0.00%0.04%0.04%
PPLPpl Corp (Utilities)0.00%0.04%0.04%
HUBBHubbell Inc0.00%0.02%0.02%

You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.

Whichever of VTBNX and VV you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.

VTBNXVV

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, VTBNX or VV?

VTBNX has an expense ratio of 0.02% while VV charges 0.03%. VTBNX is the cheaper option, by $1 a year on a $10,000 investment.

Which is riskier, VTBNX or VV?

VV has been the more volatile fund at 15.9% annualized versus 6.4% for VTBNX. Worst drawdown: VTBNX -20.8% vs VV -26.5%.

Should I hold both VTBNX and VV?

VTBNX and VV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.62, 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 VTBNX and VV?

At least 1.5% of VV's money is in holdings VTBNX also owns. Our book for VTBNX is partial, so the real figure is this or higher. They hold 11 positions in common, counted across the 12,623 positions we hold weights for in VTBNX and 431 in VV.

Which pays a higher dividend, VTBNX or VV?

VTBNX yields 4.16% while VV yields 0.99%, so VTBNX currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is it better to hold VTBNX or VV in a taxable account?

VV is an ETF and VTBNX is a mutual fund. An ETF can meet redemptions in kind, so it rarely distributes a capital gain to the people holding it. A mutual fund that sells holdings to meet redemptions can pass a realised gain to every holder at year end. In a tax-deferred account that difference largely disappears. This is information, not a recommendation.

Is VV better than VTBNX?

VTBNX has a lower expense ratio. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.