VTI vs XMHQ
Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF vs Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF
Which is better, VTI or XMHQ?
Large Cap Blend against Mid Cap Blend.
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. XMHQ is less concentrated, with 30.6% 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 | VTI | XMHQ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.25% |
| AUM | $689.2B | $5.3B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 0.55% |
| Holdings | 3,524 | 167 |
| YTD Return | +13.02%Best | +9.97% |
| 1Y Return | +16.63%Best | +9.22% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.97%Best | +14.55% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.99%Best | +9.59% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.8%Best | 17.6% |
| Max Drawdown | -56.6%Best | -58.4% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,616Best | $15,807 |
| Top 10 Weight | 33.5% | 30.6%Best |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Mid Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 24, 2001 | Dec 1, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 1, 2006 to Oct 14, 2026 (19.9 years).
VTI vs XMHQ 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 19.9 years both funds cover.
VTI vs XMHQ Performance
Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is an ETF from Vanguard (US) and Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF (XMHQ) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year VTI returned +16.63% while XMHQ returned +9.22%. Year to date, VTI is up 13.02% versus a gain of 9.97% for XMHQ.
Over three years, VTI compounded at +21.97% per year against +14.55% for XMHQ; over five years the annualized figures are +11.99% and +9.59% respectively. Across the full 20-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +9.32% annualized vs +8.42%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
XMHQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.6% compared with 15.8% 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 -56.6% for VTI and -58.4% for XMHQ. 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
VTI charges 0.03% per year while XMHQ charges 0.25%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $25 annually, a gap of $22 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, VTI currently yields 1.06% against 0.55% for XMHQ.
Holdings Overlap
0.9% of VTI's money is in holdings XMHQ also owns. 96.7% of XMHQ's money is in holdings VTI also owns.
Most of XMHQ is already inside VTI. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
75 positions in common, counted across the 3,441 positions we hold weights for in VTI and 79 in XMHQ, against full books of 3,524 and 167.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 4 positions for XMHQ that do not appear in our book for VTI (3.3% of the fund), and 1,090 for VTI that do not appear in XMHQ (96.7%).
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 VTI | Weight in XMHQ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0RMV:LNTechnipfmc Plc Ordinary Shares | 0.04% | 4.44% | 4.40% |
| MEDPMedpace Holdings Inc | 0.02% | 3.64% | 3.62% |
| NVT:IENvent Electric Plc Ordinary Shares | 0.03% | 3.61% | 3.58% |
| MANHManhattan Associates Inc | 0.02% | 3.33% | 3.31% |
| EXELExelixis Inc | 0.02% | 3.32% | 3.30% |
| UTHRUnited Therapeutics Corp | 0.03% | 2.96% | 2.93% |
| CWCurtiss-wright Corp | 0.03% | 2.71% | 2.68% |
| CRSCarpenter Technology Corpcommon Stock | 0.03% | 2.25% | 2.22% |
| CSLCsl Ltd. - Adr | 0.02% | 2.24% | 2.22% |
| LECOLincoln Electric Holdings Inc | 0.02% | 2.15% | 2.13% |
96.7% of XMHQ 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, VTI or XMHQ?
VTI has an expense ratio of 0.03% while XMHQ charges 0.25%. VTI is the cheaper option, by $22 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, VTI or XMHQ?
Over the past year VTI returned +16.63% vs +9.22% for XMHQ, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (20 years), VTI annualized +9.32% vs +8.42% for XMHQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, VTI or XMHQ?
XMHQ has been the more volatile fund at 17.6% annualized versus 15.8% for VTI. Worst drawdown: VTI -56.6% vs XMHQ -58.4%.
Should I hold both VTI and XMHQ?
VTI and XMHQ 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 VTI and XMHQ?
96.7% of XMHQ's money is in holdings VTI also owns. 96.7% of XMHQ's is in holdings VTI also owns. They hold 75 positions in common, counted across the 3,441 positions we hold weights for in VTI and 79 in XMHQ.
Which pays a higher dividend, VTI or XMHQ?
VTI yields 1.06% while XMHQ yields 0.55%, so VTI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is XMHQ better than VTI?
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. XMHQ is less concentrated, with 30.6% 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.