SCOW vs VTI
Pacer S&P SmallCap 600 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, SCOW or VTI?
Small Cap Blend against Large Cap Blend.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y and the full window. VTI is less concentrated, with 33.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 39.7%.
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 | SCOW | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.59% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $2M | $689.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.56% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 162 | 3,524 |
| YTD Return | +13.27%Best | +13.02% |
| 1Y Return | +10.02% | +16.63%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +21.97% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +11.99% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.3% | 12.2%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -10.1% | -8.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.1 years | $11,085 | $11,888Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 39.7% | 33.5%Best |
| Fund Family | Pacer ETFs | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Small Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Aug 27, 2025 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.1 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 28, 2025 to Oct 14, 2026 (1.1 years).
SCOW 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 1.1 years both funds cover.
SCOW vs VTI Performance
Pacer S&P SmallCap 600 Quality FCF Aristocrats ETF (SCOW) is an ETF from Pacer ETFs and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year SCOW returned +10.02% while VTI returned +16.63%. Year to date, SCOW is up 13.27% versus a gain of 13.02% for VTI.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SCOW has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 13.3% compared with 12.2% 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 -10.1% for SCOW and -8.9% 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 0.63. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
SCOW charges 0.59% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $59 vs $3 annually, a gap of $56 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, SCOW currently yields 0.56% against 1.06% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
97.6% of SCOW's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 0.3% of VTI's money is in holdings SCOW also owns.
Most of SCOW is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
75 positions in common, counted across the 77 positions we hold weights for in SCOW and 3,441 in VTI, against full books of 162 and 3,524.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,128 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for SCOW (97.3% of the fund), and 2 for SCOW that do not appear in VTI (2.4%).
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 SCOW | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| JXNJackson Financial Inc USD | 5.69% | 0.01% | 5.68% |
| PAYCPaycom Software Inc . | 4.77% | 0.01% | 4.76% |
| ETSYEtsy Inc | 4.69% | 0.01% | 4.68% |
| MTCHMatch Group Inc | 4.29% | 0.01% | 4.28% |
| MKTXMarketaxess Holdings Inc?.? | 4.01% | 0.01% | 4.00% |
| BOXBox Inc - Class A | 3.73% | 0.01% | 3.72% |
| ENVAEnova International Inc. (usd) | 3.50% | 0.01% | 3.49% |
| BFHBread Financial Holdings, Inc. | 3.30% | 0.01% | 3.29% |
| MGYMagnolia Oil & Gas Corp | 3.28% | 0.01% | 3.27% |
| QRVOQorvo Inc_None_0 | 2.41% | 0.01% | 2.40% |
97.6% of SCOW 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, SCOW or VTI?
SCOW has an expense ratio of 0.59% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $56 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, SCOW or VTI?
Over the past year SCOW returned +10.02% vs +16.63% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (1 years), SCOW annualized +9.82% vs +17.03% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, SCOW or VTI?
SCOW has been the more volatile fund at 13.3% annualized versus 12.2% for VTI. Worst drawdown: SCOW -10.1% vs VTI -8.9%.
Should I hold both SCOW and VTI?
SCOW and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.63, 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 SCOW and VTI?
97.6% of SCOW's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 0.3% of VTI's is in holdings SCOW also owns. They hold 75 positions in common, counted across the 77 positions we hold weights for in SCOW and 3,441 in VTI.
Which pays a higher dividend, SCOW or VTI?
SCOW yields 0.56% while VTI yields 1.06%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than SCOW?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y and the full window. VTI is less concentrated, with 33.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 39.7%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.