AUSF vs VTI
Global X Adaptive US Factor ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, AUSF or VTI?
Mid Cap Value against Large Cap Blend.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. AUSF led over 5Y, VTI over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. AUSF is less concentrated, with 17.3% 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 | AUSF | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.27% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $867M | $689.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 2.83% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 382 | 3,524 |
| YTD Return | +8.67% | +13.02%Best |
| 1Y Return | +11.44% | +16.63%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +19.09% | +21.97%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.11%Best | +11.99% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.3% | 17.2%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -44.3% | -35.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,514Best | $17,616 |
| Top 10 Weight | 17.3%Best | 33.5% |
| Fund Family | Global X by mirae Asset | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Value | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Aug 24, 2018 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 28, 2018 to Oct 14, 2026 (8.1 years).
AUSF 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 8.1 years both funds cover.
AUSF vs VTI Performance
Global X Adaptive US Factor ETF (AUSF) is an ETF from Global X by mirae Asset and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year AUSF returned +11.44% while VTI returned +16.63%. Year to date, AUSF is up 8.67% versus a gain of 13.02% for VTI.
Over three years, AUSF compounded at +19.09% per year against +21.97% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +13.11% and +11.99% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +13.11% annualized vs +10.71%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
AUSF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.3% compared with 17.2% 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 -44.3% for AUSF 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 0.84. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AUSF charges 0.27% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $27 vs $3 annually, a gap of $24 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AUSF currently yields 2.83% against 1.06% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
91.2% of AUSF's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 30.5% of VTI's money is in holdings AUSF also owns.
Most of AUSF is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
177 positions in common, counted across the 189 positions we hold weights for in AUSF and 3,441 in VTI, against full books of 382 and 3,524.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 982 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for AUSF (67.1% of the fund), and 6 for AUSF that do not appear in VTI (5.5%).
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 AUSF | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple, Inc | 1.61% | 6.30% | 4.69% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 1.93% | 5.11% | 3.18% |
| BRK.BBerkshire Hathaway Inc-Cl B | 1.61% | 1.23% | 0.38% |
| GOOGLAlphabet, Inc. - Class a | 0.09% | 2.70% | 2.61% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson | 1.57% | 0.87% | 0.70% |
| VZVerizon Communications | 2.17% | 0.25% | 1.92% |
| TAt&t Inc Cdi Common Stock Usd1.0 | 2.07% | 0.24% | 1.83% |
| GOOGAlphabate, Inc Class C | 0.09% | 2.12% | 2.03% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 1.57% | 0.53% | 1.04% |
| WMTWalmart, Inc. | 1.28% | 0.62% | 0.66% |
91.2% of AUSF 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, AUSF or VTI?
AUSF has an expense ratio of 0.27% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $24 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, AUSF or VTI?
Over the past year AUSF returned +11.44% vs +16.63% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), AUSF annualized +10.71% vs +13.11% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, AUSF or VTI?
AUSF has been the more volatile fund at 17.3% annualized versus 17.2% for VTI. Worst drawdown: AUSF -44.3% vs VTI -35.0%.
Should I hold both AUSF and VTI?
AUSF and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.84, 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 AUSF and VTI?
91.2% of AUSF's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 30.5% of VTI's is in holdings AUSF also owns. They hold 177 positions in common, counted across the 189 positions we hold weights for in AUSF and 3,441 in VTI.
Which pays a higher dividend, AUSF or VTI?
AUSF yields 2.83% while VTI yields 1.06%, so AUSF currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than AUSF?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. AUSF led over 5Y, VTI over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. AUSF is less concentrated, with 17.3% 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.