QMOM vs VTI
Alpha Architect US Quantitative Momentum ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, QMOM or VTI?
Mid Cap Growth against Large Cap Blend.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. QMOM is less concentrated, with 21.2% 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 | QMOM | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.29% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $437M | $689.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.49% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 121 | 3,524 |
| YTD Return | +9.96% | +13.02%Best |
| 1Y Return | +13.53% | +16.63%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.00% | +21.97%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.72% | +11.99%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 21.7% | 15.5%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -39.1% | -35.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $15,190 | $17,616Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 21.2%Best | 33.5% |
| Fund Family | Alpha Architect | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Growth | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Dec 1, 2015 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 2, 2015 to Oct 14, 2026 (10.9 years).
QMOM 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 10.9 years both funds cover.
QMOM vs VTI Performance
Alpha Architect US Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM) is an ETF from Alpha Architect and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year QMOM returned +13.53% while VTI returned +16.63%. Year to date, QMOM is up 9.96% versus a gain of 13.02% for VTI.
Over three years, QMOM compounded at +21.00% per year against +21.97% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +8.72% and +11.99% respectively. Across the full 11-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +13.10% annualized vs +10.94%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QMOM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 21.7% compared with 15.5% 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 -39.1% for QMOM 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 0.81. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
QMOM charges 0.29% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $29 vs $3 annually, a gap of $26 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, QMOM currently yields 0.49% against 1.06% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
89.9% of QMOM's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 3.7% of VTI's money is in holdings QMOM also owns.
Most of QMOM is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
45 positions in common, counted across the 51 positions we hold weights for in QMOM and 3,441 in VTI, against full books of 121 and 3,524.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,114 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for QMOM (93.9% of the fund), and 4 for QMOM that do not appear in VTI (6.2%).
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 QMOM | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| CATCaterpillar, Inc. | 2.00% | 0.50% | 1.50% |
| PANWPalo Alto Networks, Inc | 2.05% | 0.42% | 1.63% |
| MRKMerck & Company Inc | 1.92% | 0.49% | 1.43% |
| CRWDCrowdstrike Holdings Inc | 2.03% | 0.30% | 1.73% |
| MPCMarathon Petroleum Corp | 2.13% | 0.15% | 1.98% |
| VLOValero Energy | 2.09% | 0.14% | 1.95% |
| PSXPhillips 66 | 2.08% | 0.13% | 1.95% |
| PBFPbf Energy Inc | 2.18% | 0.01% | 2.17% |
| HPEHewlett Packard Enterprise Co | 2.10% | 0.09% | 2.01% |
| DELLDell Technologies Inc | 1.99% | 0.18% | 1.81% |
89.9% of QMOM 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, QMOM or VTI?
QMOM has an expense ratio of 0.29% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $26 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, QMOM or VTI?
Over the past year QMOM returned +13.53% vs +16.63% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (11 years), QMOM annualized +10.94% vs +13.10% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, QMOM or VTI?
QMOM has been the more volatile fund at 21.7% annualized versus 15.5% for VTI. Worst drawdown: QMOM -39.1% vs VTI -35.0%.
Should I hold both QMOM and VTI?
QMOM and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.81, 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 QMOM and VTI?
89.9% of QMOM's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 3.7% of VTI's is in holdings QMOM also owns. They hold 45 positions in common, counted across the 51 positions we hold weights for in QMOM and 3,441 in VTI.
Which pays a higher dividend, QMOM or VTI?
QMOM yields 0.49% while VTI yields 1.06%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than QMOM?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. QMOM is less concentrated, with 21.2% 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.