VTI vs XJR
Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF vs iShares ESG Select Screened S&P Small-Cap ETF
Which is better, VTI or XJR?
Large Cap Blend against Small Cap Blend.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, XJR over 1Y. XJR is less concentrated, with 9.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.3%.
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 | VTI | XJR |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.12% |
| AUM | $666.9B | $211M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.03% | 0.95% |
| Holdings | 3,543 | 602 |
| YTD Return | +11.53% | +14.76%Best |
| 1Y Return | +15.74% | +16.44%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.67%Best | +14.51% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.59%Best | +6.27% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.6%Best | 20.4% |
| Max Drawdown | -25.4%Best | -27.1% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,303Best | $13,554 |
| Top 10 Weight | 33.3% | 9.3%Best |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Small Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 24, 2001 | Sep 22, 2020 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 24, 2020 to Sep 15, 2026 (6 years).
VTI vs XJR 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 6 years both funds cover.
VTI vs XJR Performance
Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US) and iShares ESG Select Screened S&P Small-Cap ETF (XJR) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year VTI returned +15.74% while XJR returned +16.44%. Year to date, VTI is up 11.53% versus a gain of 14.76% for XJR.
Over three years, VTI compounded at +20.67% per year against +14.51% for XJR; over five years the annualized figures are +11.59% and +6.27% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +16.10% annualized vs +13.70%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
XJR has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.4% compared with 15.6% for VTI. 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 -25.4% for VTI and -27.1% for XJR. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.83. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
VTI charges 0.03% per year while XJR charges 0.12%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $12 annually, a gap of $9 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, VTI currently yields 1.03% against 0.95% for XJR.
Holdings Overlap
1.5% of VTI's money is in holdings XJR also owns. 93.1% of XJR's money is in holdings VTI also owns.
Most of XJR is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
511 positions in common, counted across the 3,463 positions we hold weights for in VTI and 524 in XJR, against full books of 3,543 and 602.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 8 positions for XJR that do not appear in our book for VTI (4.8% of the fund), and 999 for VTI that do not appear in XJR (96.0%).
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 VTI | Weight in XJR | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| CORTCorcept Therapeutics Incorporated | 0.01% | 0.71% | 0.70% |
| GKOSGlaukos Corp. | 0.01% | 0.68% | 0.67% |
| EATBrinker International, Inc. | 0.01% | 0.66% | 0.65% |
| PAYCPaycom Software Inc . | 0.01% | 0.64% | 0.63% |
| MTCHMatch Group Inc | 0.01% | 0.64% | 0.63% |
| VSATViasat Inc | 0.01% | 0.59% | 0.58% |
| PTGXProtagonist Therapeutics Inc | 0.01% | 0.58% | 0.57% |
| RHPRyman Healthcare Limited | 0.01% | 0.55% | 0.54% |
| EMNEastman Chemical Co. | 0.01% | 0.52% | 0.51% |
| ALKS:IEAlkermes Plc. Ordinary Shares | 0.01% | 0.51% | 0.50% |
93.1% of XJR is already inside VTI.
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, VTI or XJR?
VTI has an expense ratio of 0.03% while XJR charges 0.12%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $9 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, VTI or XJR?
Over the past year VTI returned +15.74% vs +16.44% for XJR, so XJR leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), VTI annualized +16.10% vs +13.70% for XJR. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, VTI or XJR?
XJR has been the more volatile fund at 20.4% annualized versus 15.6% for VTI. Worst drawdown: VTI -25.4% vs XJR -27.1%.
Should I hold both VTI and XJR?
VTI and XJR have a monthly-return correlation of 0.83, 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 VTI and XJR?
93.1% of XJR's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 93.1% of XJR's is in holdings VTI also owns. They hold 511 positions in common, counted across the 3,463 positions we hold weights for in VTI and 524 in XJR.
Which pays a higher dividend, VTI or XJR?
VTI yields 1.03% while XJR yields 0.95%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is XJR better than VTI?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, XJR over 1Y. XJR is less concentrated, with 9.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.