AFLG vs VTI
First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, AFLG or VTI?
Nearly the same fund. VTI costs less.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. AFLG led over 1Y, 3Y and 5Y, VTI over the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.98. AFLG is less concentrated, with 33.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.5%.
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 | AFLG | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.55% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $803M | $689.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.71% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 435 | 3,524 |
| YTD Return | +14.82%Best | +13.02% |
| 1Y Return | +17.70%Best | +16.63% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.47%Best | +21.97% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.74%Best | +11.99% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.6%Best | 17.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -35.8% | -35.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,213Best | $17,616 |
| Top 10 Weight | 33.0%Best | 33.5% |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Dec 4, 2019 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 4, 2019 to Oct 14, 2026 (6.9 years).
AFLG 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 6.9 years both funds cover.
AFLG vs VTI Performance
First Trust Active Factor Large Cap ETF (AFLG) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year AFLG returned +17.70% while VTI returned +16.63%. Year to date, AFLG is up 14.82% versus a gain of 13.02% for VTI.
Over three years, AFLG compounded at +22.47% per year against +21.97% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +12.74% and +11.99% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +14.75% annualized vs +13.51%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.3% compared with 16.6% for AFLG. 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 -35.8% for AFLG 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 0.98. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AFLG charges 0.55% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $55 vs $3 annually, a gap of $52 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AFLG currently yields 0.71% against 1.06% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
97.5% of AFLG's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 54.2% of VTI's money is in holdings AFLG also owns.
Most of AFLG is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
213 positions in common, counted across the 218 positions we hold weights for in AFLG and 3,441 in VTI, against full books of 435 and 3,524.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 945 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for AFLG (43.4% of the fund), and 2 for AFLG that do not appear in VTI (0.9%).
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 AFLG | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp. | 7.85% | 6.88% | 0.97% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 6.58% | 6.30% | 0.28% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 4.00% | 5.11% | 1.11% |
| GOOGLAlphabet, Inc. - Class a | 5.62% | 2.70% | 2.92% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 2.37% | 3.41% | 1.04% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.50% | 2.38% | 0.12% |
| METAMeta Platforms, Inc. | 0.79% | 1.70% | 0.91% |
| VVisa Inc-class A Shares | 1.03% | 0.85% | 0.18% |
| XOMExxonmobil Corp. | 0.98% | 0.90% | 0.08% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 0.36% | 1.46% | 1.10% |
97.5% of AFLG 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, AFLG or VTI?
AFLG has an expense ratio of 0.55% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $52 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, AFLG or VTI?
Over the past year AFLG returned +17.70% vs +16.63% for VTI, so AFLG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), AFLG annualized +13.51% vs +14.75% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, AFLG or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 17.3% annualized versus 16.6% for AFLG. Worst drawdown: AFLG -35.8% vs VTI -35.0%.
Should I hold both AFLG and VTI?
AFLG and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.98, 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 AFLG and VTI?
97.5% of AFLG's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 54.2% of VTI's is in holdings AFLG also owns. They hold 213 positions in common, counted across the 218 positions we hold weights for in AFLG and 3,441 in VTI.
Which pays a higher dividend, AFLG or VTI?
AFLG yields 0.71% while VTI yields 1.06%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than AFLG?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. AFLG led over 1Y, 3Y and 5Y, VTI over the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.98. AFLG is less concentrated, with 33.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 33.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.