OAKM vs XLF
Oakmark US Large Cap ETF vs State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF
Which is better, OAKM or XLF?
OAKM has been ahead.
XLF has a lower expense ratio. OAKM led over 1Y and the full window. OAKM is less concentrated, with 35.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.3%.
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 | OAKM | XLF |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.59% | 0.08%Best |
| AUM | $1.1B | $51.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.65% | 1.40% |
| Holdings | 41 | 160 |
| YTD Return | +6.05%Best | +0.47% |
| 1Y Return | +14.80%Best | +4.02% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +19.43% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +8.82% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.2%Best | 12.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -15.2%Best | -15.5% |
| $10,000 over 1.9 years | $12,344Best | $11,163 |
| Top 10 Weight | 35.0%Best | 57.3% |
| Fund Family | Oakmark Funds | SPDR State Street Global Advisors |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Dec 3, 2024 | Dec 16, 1998 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.9 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 3, 2024 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.9 years).
OAKM vs XLF 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 1.9 years both funds cover.
OAKM vs XLF Performance
Oakmark US Large Cap ETF (OAKM) is an ETF from Oakmark Funds and State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) is an ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors. Over the past year OAKM returned +14.80% while XLF returned +4.02%. Year to date, OAKM is up 6.05% versus a gain of 0.47% for XLF.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
XLF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 12.9% compared with 12.2% for OAKM. 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 -15.2% for OAKM and -15.5% for XLF. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.87. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
OAKM charges 0.59% per year while XLF charges 0.08%. On a $10,000 position that is $59 vs $8 annually, a gap of $51 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, OAKM currently yields 0.65% against 1.40% for XLF.
Holdings Overlap
32.8% of OAKM's money is in holdings XLF also owns. 18.4% of XLF's money is in holdings OAKM also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
11 positions in common, counted across the 39 positions we hold weights for in OAKM and 77 in XLF, against full books of 41 and 160.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 66 positions for XLF that do not appear in our book for OAKM (81.4% of the fund), and 26 for OAKM that do not appear in XLF (63.4%).
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 OAKM | Weight in XLF | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| BACBank of America Corp.: Financials | 3.07% | 5.07% | 2.00% |
| CCitigroup Inc. | 3.67% | 2.93% | 0.74% |
| WFCWells Fargo & Co. | 1.97% | 3.42% | 1.45% |
| SCHWSchwab Strategic T | 2.95% | 2.17% | 0.78% |
| COFCapital One Financial Corp. | 3.26% | 1.61% | 1.65% |
| ICEIntercontinental Exchange Grp Usd0.01 | 3.32% | 1.10% | 2.22% |
| STTState Street Corp. | 3.30% | 0.66% | 2.64% |
| WTW:LNWillis Towers Watson Plc Ordinary Shares | 3.27% | 0.37% | 2.90% |
| AIGAmerican International Gr | 2.71% | 0.49% | 2.22% |
| GPNGlobalpayments Inc. | 2.77% | 0.25% | 2.52% |
32.8% of OAKM is already inside XLF.
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, OAKM or XLF?
OAKM has an expense ratio of 0.59% while XLF charges 0.08%. XLF is the cheaper option, by $51 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, OAKM or XLF?
Over the past year OAKM returned +14.80% vs +4.02% for XLF, so OAKM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), OAKM annualized +11.72% vs +5.96% for XLF. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, OAKM or XLF?
XLF has been the more volatile fund at 12.9% annualized versus 12.2% for OAKM. Worst drawdown: OAKM -15.2% vs XLF -15.5%.
Should I hold both OAKM and XLF?
OAKM and XLF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.87, 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 OAKM and XLF?
32.8% of OAKM's money is in holdings XLF also owns. 18.4% of XLF's is in holdings OAKM also owns. They hold 11 positions in common, counted across the 39 positions we hold weights for in OAKM and 77 in XLF.
Which pays a higher dividend, OAKM or XLF?
OAKM yields 0.65% while XLF yields 1.40%, so XLF currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is XLF better than OAKM?
XLF has a lower expense ratio. OAKM led over 1Y and the full window. OAKM is less concentrated, with 35.0% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.