VFH vs VTI
VFH vs VTI · Last updated April 5, 2026
| Metric | VFH | VTI | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | $121.32 | $323.76 | — |
| Expense Ratio | 0.09% | 0.03% | VTI |
| Dividend Yield | N/A | N/A | — |
| AUM | $13.9B | $2.1T | VTI |
Performance Comparison
| Period | VFH | VTI |
|---|---|---|
| 1M | -2.79% | -3.34% |
| 3M | -11.16% | -4.15% |
| 6M | -6.63% | -1.30% |
| YTD | -8.83% | -3.13% |
| 1Y | +16.52% | +31.84% |
| 3Y | N/A | N/A |
| 5Y | N/A | N/A |
Dividend Comparison
| Ex-Date | Ticker | Amount |
|---|---|---|
| March 27, 2026 | VTI | $1.00 |
| March 24, 2026 | VFH | $0.38 |
| December 22, 2025 | VTI | $0.95 |
| December 17, 2025 | VFH | $0.68 |
| September 29, 2025 | VTI | $0.91 |
| September 24, 2025 | VFH | $0.42 |
| June 30, 2025 | VTI | $0.91 |
| June 26, 2025 | VFH | $0.47 |
| March 27, 2025 | VTI | $0.99 |
| March 25, 2025 | VFH | $0.51 |
| December 23, 2024 | VTI | $0.94 |
| December 18, 2024 | VFH | $0.66 |
| September 27, 2024 | VFH | $0.55 |
| September 27, 2024 | VTI | $0.87 |
| June 28, 2024 | VFH | $0.46 |
| June 28, 2024 | VTI | $0.95 |
| March 22, 2024 | VFH | $0.40 |
| March 22, 2024 | VTI | $0.91 |
| December 21, 2023 | VTI | $1.00 |
| December 19, 2023 | VFH | $0.54 |
Key Differences
VFH and VTI 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.
On the cost front, VTI (0.03% expense ratio) is more economical than VFH (0.09%). For a $100,000 investment, the annual fee difference is $60.00. Over decades, this cost advantage compounds meaningfully.
In terms of fund size, VTI manages $2.1T compared to VFH's $13.9B. This size advantage typically means VTI has better liquidity, making it easier to trade large positions without significant price impact.
The data above reflects the most recent available information. Market conditions change frequently, and investors should verify current figures before making decisions.
How to Compare VFH and VTI
- If minimizing costs is a priority, compare the expense ratios: VFH charges 0.09% and VTI charges 0.03%.
- 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 VTI a better investment?
Whether VFH or VTI is more suitable depends on your individual investment goals, risk tolerance, and time horizon. VFH and VTI 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 VTI?
VTI has an expense ratio of 0.03%, while VFH charges 0.09%. On a $10,000 investment, this 0.06% difference costs approximately $6.00 per year.
Which fund is larger, VFH or VTI?
VTI has $2.1T 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 VTI?
Both VFH and VTI 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