VTI vs XLF
Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF vs State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 3,543 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | VTI | XLF | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.08% | |
| AUM | $663.5B | $56.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.07% | 1.51% | |
| Holdings | 3,543 | 80 | |
| YTD Return | +14.96% | +6.98% | |
| 1Y Return | +22.39% | +12.14% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.51% | +20.59% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.36% | +10.49% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.4% | 21.4% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.6% | -83.8% | |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 24, 2001 | Dec 16, 1998 |
VTI vs XLF Performance
Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US) and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) is a ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors. Over the past year VTI returned +22.39% while XLF returned +12.14%. Year to date, VTI is up 14.96% versus a gain of 6.98% for XLF.
Over three years, VTI compounded at +21.51% per year against +20.59% for XLF; over five years the annualized figures are +12.36% and +10.49% respectively. Across the full 25-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +8.16% annualized vs +3.73%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
XLF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 21.4% compared with 15.4% 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 -56.6% for VTI and -83.8% for XLF. 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 0.83. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
VTI charges 0.03% per year while XLF charges 0.08%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $8 annually, a gap of $5 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, VTI currently yields 1.07% against 1.51% for XLF.
Holdings Overlap
VTI and XLF share 72 holdings out of 2788 unique holdings combined, representing a 10.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, VTI or XLF?
VTI has an expense ratio of 0.03% while XLF charges 0.08%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $5 per year of difference.
Which performed better, VTI or XLF?
Over the past year VTI returned +22.39% vs +12.14% for XLF, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (25 years), VTI annualized +8.16% vs +3.73% for XLF. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, VTI or XLF?
XLF has been the more volatile fund at 21.4% annualized versus 15.4% for VTI. Worst drawdown: VTI -56.6% vs XLF -83.8%.
Should I hold both VTI and XLF?
VTI and XLF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.83, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between VTI and XLF?
VTI and XLF share 72 common holdings with a 10.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2788 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, VTI or XLF?
VTI yields 1.07% while XLF yields 1.51%, so XLF 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.