ABFL vs VTI
Abacus FCF Leaders ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, ABFL or VTI?
Nearly the same fund. VTI costs less.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. VTI is less concentrated, with 33.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 35.0%.
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 | ABFL | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.49% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $473M | $689.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.60% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 58 | 3,524 |
| YTD Return | +11.62% | +13.02%Best |
| 1Y Return | +12.48% | +16.63%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.92% | +21.97%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +10.39% | +11.99%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.8%Tie | 15.8%Tie |
| Max Drawdown | -35.0%Tie | -35.0%Tie |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $16,393 | $17,616Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 35.0% | 33.5%Best |
| Fund Family | FCF Advisors | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Sep 27, 2016 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 28, 2016 to Oct 14, 2026 (10 years).
ABFL vs VTI 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 10 years both funds cover.
ABFL vs VTI Performance
Abacus FCF Leaders ETF (ABFL) is an ETF from FCF Advisors and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year ABFL returned +12.48% while VTI returned +16.63%. Year to date, ABFL is up 11.62% versus a gain of 13.02% for VTI.
Over three years, ABFL compounded at +15.92% per year against +21.97% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +10.39% and +11.99% respectively. Across the full 10-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +13.78% annualized vs +13.69%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ABFL and VTI have been equally volatile, both at 15.8% annualized.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -35.0% for ABFL and -35.0% for VTI. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.96. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ABFL charges 0.49% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $49 vs $3 annually, a gap of $46 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ABFL currently yields 0.60% against 1.06% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
93.4% of ABFL's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 23.2% of VTI's money is in holdings ABFL also owns.
Most of ABFL is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
49 positions in common, counted across the 54 positions we hold weights for in ABFL and 3,441 in VTI, against full books of 58 and 3,524.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,108 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for ABFL (74.4% of the fund), and 4 for ABFL that do not appear in VTI (5.0%).
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 ABFL | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 5.30% | 6.88% | 1.58% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 5.55% | 6.30% | 0.75% |
| GEVGe Vernova, Inc. | 4.03% | 0.33% | 3.70% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 2.99% | 1.33% | 1.66% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 2.98% | 0.61% | 2.37% |
| LRCXLrcx Uw Equity | 3.00% | 0.51% | 2.49% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 2.57% | 0.63% | 1.94% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 2.32% | 0.85% | 1.47% |
| GILDGilead Sciences | 2.90% | 0.25% | 2.65% |
| PANWPalo Alto Networks, Inc | 2.70% | 0.42% | 2.28% |
93.4% of ABFL 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, ABFL or VTI?
ABFL has an expense ratio of 0.49% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $46 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, ABFL or VTI?
Over the past year ABFL returned +12.48% vs +16.63% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (10 years), ABFL annualized +13.69% vs +13.78% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, ABFL or VTI?
ABFL and VTI have been equally volatile, both at 15.8% annualized. Worst drawdown: ABFL -35.0% vs VTI -35.0%.
Should I hold both ABFL and VTI?
ABFL and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.96, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between ABFL and VTI?
93.4% of ABFL's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 23.2% of VTI's is in holdings ABFL also owns. They hold 49 positions in common, counted across the 54 positions we hold weights for in ABFL and 3,441 in VTI.
Which pays a higher dividend, ABFL or VTI?
ABFL yields 0.60% while VTI yields 1.06%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than ABFL?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. VTI is less concentrated, with 33.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 35.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.