VWO vs XLV
Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF vs State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF
Quick Verdict
VWO has a lower expense ratio. XLV delivered stronger 1-year returns. VWO offers more diversification with 6,334 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | VWO | XLV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.06% | 0.08% | |
| AUM | $122.0B | $43.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 2.39% | 1.56% | |
| Holdings | 6,334 | 63 | |
| YTD Return | +10.18% | +13.25% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.99% | +29.65% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +18.45% | +11.30% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.14% | +6.83% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 20.1% | 14.2% | |
| Max Drawdown | -68.3% | -40.6% | |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Mar 4, 2005 | Dec 16, 1998 |
VWO vs XLV Performance
Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets ETF (VWO) is a ETF from Vanguard (US) and State Street Health Care Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLV) is a ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors. Over the past year VWO returned +20.99% while XLV returned +29.65%. Year to date, VWO is up 10.18% versus a gain of 13.25% for XLV.
Over three years, VWO compounded at +18.45% per year against +11.30% for XLV; over five years the annualized figures are +7.14% and +6.83% respectively. Across the full 21-year window we track, XLV has the edge at +7.62% annualized vs +4.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VWO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.1% compared with 14.2% for XLV. 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 -68.3% for VWO and -40.6% for XLV. 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 0.48. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
VWO charges 0.06% per year while XLV charges 0.08%. On a $10,000 position that is $6 vs $8 annually, a gap of $2 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, VWO currently yields 2.39% against 1.56% for XLV.
Holdings Overlap
VWO and XLV share 0 holdings out of 4044 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, VWO or XLV?
VWO has an expense ratio of 0.06% while XLV charges 0.08%. VWO is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $2 per year of difference.
Which performed better, VWO or XLV?
Over the past year VWO returned +20.99% vs +29.65% for XLV, so XLV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (21 years), VWO annualized +4.98% vs +7.62% for XLV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, VWO or XLV?
VWO has been the more volatile fund at 20.1% annualized versus 14.2% for XLV. Worst drawdown: VWO -68.3% vs XLV -40.6%.
Should I hold both VWO and XLV?
VWO and XLV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.48, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between VWO and XLV?
VWO and XLV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 4044 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, VWO or XLV?
VWO yields 2.39% while XLV yields 1.56%, so VWO 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.