SROI vs VTI
Calamos Antetokounmpo Global Sustainable Equities ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Which is better, SROI or VTI?
Large Cap Growth against Large Cap Blend.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. SROI is less concentrated, with 32.0% 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 | SROI | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.95% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $17M | $689.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.54% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 130 | 3,524 |
| YTD Return | +10.48% | +13.02%Best |
| 1Y Return | +13.66% | +16.63%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +16.01% | +21.97%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +11.99% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.1%Best | 12.6% |
| Max Drawdown | -15.9%Best | -19.3% |
| $10,000 over 3.7 years | $15,381 | $19,254Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 32.0%Best | 33.5% |
| Fund Family | Calamos Investments | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Feb 3, 2023 | May 24, 2001 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.7 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 6, 2023 to Oct 14, 2026 (3.7 years).
SROI 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 3.7 years both funds cover.
SROI vs VTI Performance
Calamos Antetokounmpo Global Sustainable Equities ETF (SROI) is an ETF from Calamos Investments and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year SROI returned +13.66% while VTI returned +16.63%. Year to date, SROI is up 10.48% versus a gain of 13.02% for VTI.
Over three years, SROI compounded at +16.01% per year against +21.97% for VTI. Across the full 4-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +19.37% annualized vs +12.34%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 12.6% compared with 12.1% for SROI. 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 -15.9% for SROI and -19.3% 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 0.92. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
SROI charges 0.95% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $95 vs $3 annually, a gap of $92 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, SROI currently yields 0.54% against 1.06% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
58.0% of SROI's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 38.6% of VTI's money is in holdings SROI also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
60 positions in common, counted across the 123 positions we hold weights for in SROI and 3,441 in VTI, against full books of 130 and 3,524.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1,097 positions for VTI that do not appear in our book for SROI (59.0% of the fund), and 4 for SROI that do not appear in VTI (2.9%).
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 SROI | Weight in VTI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 4.43% | 6.88% | 2.45% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 4.54% | 6.30% | 1.76% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 4.04% | 5.11% | 1.07% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 5.54% | 2.70% | 2.84% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 2.61% | 3.41% | 0.80% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 1.58% | 2.38% | 0.80% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 1.63% | 0.85% | 0.78% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 1.08% | 1.33% | 0.25% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 1.79% | 0.49% | 1.30% |
| APHAmphenol Corp. Class A | 1.18% | 0.26% | 0.92% |
58.0% of SROI 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, SROI or VTI?
SROI has an expense ratio of 0.95% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $92 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, SROI or VTI?
Over the past year SROI returned +13.66% vs +16.63% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), SROI annualized +12.34% vs +19.37% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, SROI or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 12.6% annualized versus 12.1% for SROI. Worst drawdown: SROI -15.9% vs VTI -19.3%.
Should I hold both SROI and VTI?
SROI and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.92, 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 SROI and VTI?
58.0% of SROI's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 38.6% of VTI's is in holdings SROI also owns. They hold 60 positions in common, counted across the 123 positions we hold weights for in SROI and 3,441 in VTI.
Which pays a higher dividend, SROI or VTI?
SROI yields 0.54% while VTI yields 1.06%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VTI better than SROI?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. SROI is less concentrated, with 32.0% 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.