VTI vs XPH
Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF vs State Street SPDR S&P Pharmaceuticals ETF
Which is better, VTI or XPH?
Large Cap Blend against Mid Cap Blend.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, XPH over 1Y. XPH is less concentrated, with 25.6% 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 | XPH |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.35% |
| AUM | $666.9B | $607M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.03% | 0.47% |
| Holdings | 3,543 | 67 |
| YTD Return | +12.43% | +21.41%Best |
| 1Y Return | +15.92% | +41.35%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.42%Best | +20.11% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.37%Best | +8.24% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.7%Best | 19.4% |
| Max Drawdown | -56.6% | -52.7%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,916Best | $14,857 |
| Top 10 Weight | 33.3% | 25.6%Best |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | State Street Investment Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Mid Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 24, 2001 | Jun 19, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 22, 2006 to Sep 28, 2026 (20.3 years).
VTI vs XPH 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 20.3 years both funds cover.
VTI vs XPH Performance
Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US) and State Street SPDR S&P Pharmaceuticals ETF (XPH) is an ETF from State Street Investment Management. Over the past year VTI returned +15.92% while XPH returned +41.35%. Year to date, VTI is up 12.43% versus a gain of 21.41% for XPH.
Over three years, VTI compounded at +22.42% per year against +20.11% for XPH; over five years the annualized figures are +12.37% and +8.24% respectively. Across the full 20-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +9.72% annualized vs +7.78%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
XPH has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.4% compared with 15.7% 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 -52.7% for XPH. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.65. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
VTI charges 0.03% per year while XPH 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 0.47% for XPH.
Holdings Overlap
3.2% of VTI's money is in holdings XPH also owns. 92.4% of XPH's money is in holdings VTI also owns.
Most of XPH is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
60 positions in common, counted across the 3,463 positions we hold weights for in VTI and 65 in XPH, against full books of 3,543 and 67.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 3 positions for XPH that do not appear in our book for VTI (3.4% of the fund), and 1,136 for VTI that do not appear in XPH (94.3%).
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 XPH | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| CRNXCrinetics Pharmaceuticals Inc Com | 0.01% | 3.61% | 3.60% |
| MBXMbx Biosciences Inc | 0.00% | 3.37% | 3.37% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 1.35% | 1.45% | 0.10% |
| ATAIAtaibeckley Inc. | 0.00% | 2.80% | 2.80% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 0.86% | 1.58% | 0.72% |
| ELVNEnliven Therapeutics Inc | 0.00% | 2.44% | 2.44% |
| AMLXAmylyx Pharmaceuticals Inc | 0.00% | 2.40% | 2.40% |
| CORTCorcept Therapeutics Incorporated | 0.01% | 2.08% | 2.07% |
| NUVBNuvation Bio Inc | 0.00% | 2.08% | 2.08% |
| TRVITrevi Therapeutics Inc. | 0.00% | 2.07% | 2.07% |
92.4% of XPH 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 XPH?
VTI has an expense ratio of 0.03% while XPH charges 0.35%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $32 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, VTI or XPH?
Over the past year VTI returned +15.92% vs +41.35% for XPH, so XPH leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (20 years), VTI annualized +9.72% vs +7.78% for XPH. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, VTI or XPH?
XPH has been the more volatile fund at 19.4% annualized versus 15.7% for VTI. Worst drawdown: VTI -56.6% vs XPH -52.7%.
Should I hold both VTI and XPH?
VTI and XPH have a monthly-return correlation of 0.65, 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 XPH?
92.4% of XPH's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 92.4% of XPH's is in holdings VTI also owns. They hold 60 positions in common, counted across the 3,463 positions we hold weights for in VTI and 65 in XPH.
Which pays a higher dividend, VTI or XPH?
VTI yields 1.03% while XPH yields 0.47%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is XPH better than VTI?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, XPH over 1Y. XPH is less concentrated, with 25.6% 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.