VTI vs XMMO
Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF vs Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF
Which is better, VTI or XMMO?
Large Cap Blend against Mid Cap Growth.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, XMMO over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. XMMO is less concentrated, with 29.0% 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 | XMMO |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.35% |
| AUM | $666.9B | $7.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.03% | 0.63% |
| Holdings | 3,543 | 77 |
| YTD Return | +12.08%Best | +5.41% |
| 1Y Return | +16.31%Best | +10.29% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.83% | +22.75%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.89% | +12.32%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.3%Best | 18.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -56.6% | -55.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,537 | $17,877Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 33.3% | 29.0%Best |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Mid Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 24, 2001 | Mar 3, 2005 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: May 31, 2001 to Sep 14, 2026 (25.3 years).
VTI vs XMMO 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 25.3 years both funds cover.
VTI vs XMMO Performance
Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US) and Invesco S&P MidCap Momentum ETF (XMMO) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year VTI returned +16.31% while XMMO returned +10.29%. Year to date, VTI is up 12.08% versus a gain of 5.41% for XMMO.
Over three years, VTI compounded at +20.83% per year against +22.75% for XMMO; over five years the annualized figures are +11.89% and +12.32% respectively. Across the full 22-year window we track, XMMO has the edge at +11.40% annualized vs +8.03%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
XMMO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.3% compared with 15.3% 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 -55.4% for XMMO. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.67. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
VTI charges 0.03% per year while XMMO charges 0.35%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $35 annually, a gap of $32 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, VTI currently yields 1.03% against 0.63% for XMMO.
Holdings Overlap
1.3% of VTI's money is in holdings XMMO also owns. 98.8% of XMMO's money is in holdings VTI also owns.
Most of XMMO is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
73 positions in common, counted across the 3,463 positions we hold weights for in VTI and 76 in XMMO, against full books of 3,543 and 77.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 2 positions for XMMO that do not appear in our book for VTI (0.7% of the fund), and 1,081 for VTI that do not appear in XMMO (96.3%).
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 XMMO | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0RMV:LNTechnipfmc Plc Ordinary Shares | 0.04% | 4.07% | 4.03% |
| ATIAti Inc | 0.04% | 3.79% | 3.75% |
| CWCurtiss-wright Corp | 0.04% | 3.46% | 3.42% |
| RGLDRoyal Gold Inc | 0.02% | 3.19% | 3.17% |
| NVT:IENvent Electric Plc Ordinary Shares | 0.03% | 2.68% | 2.65% |
| WWDWoodward Inc | 0.03% | 2.65% | 2.62% |
| ROIV:BMRoivant Sciences Ltd. Common Shares | 0.02% | 2.55% | 2.53% |
| HLHecla Mining Co | 0.01% | 2.33% | 2.32% |
| TTMITtm Techologies | 0.02% | 2.15% | 2.13% |
| STRLSterling Construction Company Inc | 0.02% | 2.15% | 2.13% |
98.8% of XMMO 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 XMMO?
VTI has an expense ratio of 0.03% while XMMO charges 0.35%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $32 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, VTI or XMMO?
Over the past year VTI returned +16.31% vs +10.29% for XMMO, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (22 years), VTI annualized +8.03% vs +11.40% for XMMO. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, VTI or XMMO?
XMMO has been the more volatile fund at 18.3% annualized versus 15.3% for VTI. Worst drawdown: VTI -56.6% vs XMMO -55.4%.
Should I hold both VTI and XMMO?
VTI and XMMO have a monthly-return correlation of 0.67, 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 XMMO?
98.8% of XMMO's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 98.8% of XMMO's is in holdings VTI also owns. They hold 73 positions in common, counted across the 3,463 positions we hold weights for in VTI and 76 in XMMO.
Which pays a higher dividend, VTI or XMMO?
VTI yields 1.03% while XMMO yields 0.63%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is XMMO better than VTI?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, XMMO over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. XMMO is less concentrated, with 29.0% 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.