VFH vs VT
VFH vs VT · Last updated April 5, 2026
| Metric | VFH | VT | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | $121.32 | $139.37 | — |
| Expense Ratio | 0.09% | 0.06% | VT |
| Dividend Yield | N/A | N/A | — |
| AUM | $13.9B | $83.5B | VT |
Performance Comparison
| Period | VFH | VT |
|---|---|---|
| 1M | -2.79% | -2.70% |
| 3M | -11.16% | -2.51% |
| 6M | -6.63% | +1.25% |
| YTD | -8.83% | -0.97% |
| 1Y | +16.52% | +34.33% |
| 3Y | N/A | N/A |
| 5Y | N/A | N/A |
Dividend Comparison
| Ex-Date | Ticker | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| March 24, 2026 | VFH | $0.38 |
| March 20, 2026 | VT | $0.33 |
| December 19, 2025 | VT | $1.12 |
| December 17, 2025 | VFH | $0.68 |
| September 24, 2025 | VFH | $0.42 |
| September 19, 2025 | VT | $0.48 |
| June 26, 2025 | VFH | $0.47 |
| June 20, 2025 | VT | $0.60 |
| March 25, 2025 | VFH | $0.51 |
| March 21, 2025 | VT | $0.39 |
| December 20, 2024 | VT | $0.88 |
| December 18, 2024 | VFH | $0.66 |
| September 27, 2024 | VFH | $0.55 |
| September 20, 2024 | VT | $0.42 |
| June 28, 2024 | VFH | $0.46 |
| June 21, 2024 | VT | $0.58 |
| March 22, 2024 | VFH | $0.40 |
| March 15, 2024 | VT | $0.42 |
| December 19, 2023 | VFH | $0.54 |
| December 18, 2023 | VT | $0.80 |
Key Differences
VFH and VT serve different roles in many portfolios. Understanding the specific differences in cost, performance, and risk profile can help clarify which fund aligns with different investment objectives.
VT charges an expense ratio of 0.06%, which is lower than VFH's 0.09%. This 0.03% difference translates to approximately $30.00 per year on a $100,000 investment. Over a 30-year period, the compounding effect of lower fees could result in a difference of roughly $1,350.00.
VT is the larger fund with $83.5B in assets under management — roughly 6.0x the size of VFH's $13.9B. Larger AUM generally correlates with higher trading volume, tighter bid-ask spreads, and lower trading costs for investors.
All metrics shown are based on historical and trailing data. Forward-looking expectations may differ significantly from past performance.
How to Compare VFH and VT
- If minimizing costs is a priority, compare the expense ratios: VFH charges 0.09% and VT charges 0.06%.
- For liquidity, larger funds with higher AUM typically have tighter bid-ask spreads and more efficient trading.
- Review historical performance across different time periods (1-month to 5-year) to understand how each has performed in various market conditions.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is VFH or VT a better investment?
Whether VFH or VT is more suitable depends on your individual investment goals, risk tolerance, and time horizon. VFH and VT differ in key metrics like expense ratio, dividend yield, and assets under management. This page provides objective data to help you compare the two.
What is the expense ratio difference between VFH and VT?
VT has an expense ratio of 0.06%, while VFH charges 0.09%. On a $10,000 investment, this 0.03% difference costs approximately $3.00 per year.
Which fund is larger, VFH or VT?
VT has $83.5B in assets under management, making it the larger fund. Larger funds tend to have better liquidity and tighter bid-ask spreads.
What are the risks of investing in VFH vs VT?
Both VFH and VT carry market risk — their values can decline during market downturns. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Consider factors like volatility, sector concentration, and your own risk tolerance when evaluating either investment.
See how expense ratio differences affect your returns over time → Expense Ratio Calculator