IBIT vs VXUS: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
IBIT and VXUS are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. IBIT is iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF, while VXUS is Vanguard Total International Stock ETF. VXUS is broader by holdings count, with 8,821 positions versus 2 for IBIT. VXUS has the lower expense ratio. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has VXUS ahead on AIQ Score, 63 versus 61.
What is the main difference between IBIT and VXUS?
VXUS holds 8,821 positions to IBIT's 2.
| Metric | IBIT | VXUS |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.25% | 0.05% |
| Holdings | 2 | 8,821 |
| Average volume | 45,678,744 | 5,459,776 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | -24% | +12.8% |
| YTD return | -5.9% | +11% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 45.1% | 17.2% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -48.4% | -11.4% |
| Beta | 1.77 | 1.11 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.44 | 0.56 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.69 | 0.83 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 61/100 | 63/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 8/10 | 9/10 |
| Momentum | 57/100 | 41/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 35/100 | 82/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF vs Vanguard Total International Stock ETF
VXUS leads
VXUS leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience, having only recently taken the lead back from IBIT.
Fragile: 1 of 3 evidence groups support VXUS, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF
Vanguard Total International Stock ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VXUS over IBIT, 63 versus 61 as of Oct 21, 2026. VXUS's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience, while IBIT holds the stronger momentum profile. VXUS also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 1 of 3 covered evidence groups favor VXUS today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. VXUS lead: Reversed — IBIT led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; VXUS now leads by 2.
Compare iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF and Vanguard Total International Stock ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
IBIT vs VXUS: which fits what
Each row is settled by a single measure. Where the gap is too small to matter it reads Similar, and no row decides the comparison as a whole.
| If you want | IBIT | VXUS | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.25% | 0.05% | VXUS |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 2 | 8,821 | VXUS |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 1 year | -48.4% | -11.4% | VXUS |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 45.1% | 17.2% | VXUS |
Similar means the gap is within 0.01 percentage points of expense ratio, 25% more holdings, 3 points of top-10 weight, 0.2 points of yield, 2 points of drawdown or 1 point of volatility. Past drawdowns and volatility describe the funds’ history, not their future.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes for both ETFs.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare IBIT and VXUS against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Risk Resilience35 vs 82VXUS +47
- Momentum57 vs 41IBIT +16
- Quality78 vs 76Even
1 of 3 evidence groups favor VXUS. VXUS’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience; IBIT keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +3
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +6
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
VXUS's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — IBIT and VXUS both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
VXUS (Vanguard Total International Stock ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience.
IBIT (iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF): the counter-case, on momentum, technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 21.7% against 12.1%.
Fund facts, side by side
Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.
| Measure | IBIT | VXUS | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.25% | 0.05% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 2 | 8,821 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 45,678,744 | 5,459,776 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 45.1% | 17.2% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -48.4% | -11.4% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.44 | 0.56 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 1.77 | 1.11 | Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio. |
Where the exposure actually sits
Sector exposure for each fund, ordered by the size of the difference.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
1 of 3 covered evidence groups favor VXUS. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 61 vs 63 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | Not covered | Not covered |
| Technicals | IBIT | Price vs 50-day 7.5% vs -2.6%; vs 200-day 11.9% vs 0.6% |
| Risk Resilience | VXUS | Risk Resilience 35 vs 82 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of IBIT and VXUS and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 1 of 3 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on VXUS.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20VXUS lead: Reversed — IBIT led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; VXUS now leads by 2.
- Today
- VXUS +2
- 61 vs 63
- 7 sessions ago
- VXUS +3
- 58 vs 61
- 30 sessions ago
- IBIT +1
- 63 vs 62
- 90 sessions ago
- VXUS +10
- 61 vs 71
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Oct 8 when VXUS moved ahead of IBIT.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only IBIT
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only VXUS
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (1.08%)
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Golden Cross Active, MACD Bearish Crossover.
VXUS leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +2.42%, AIQ +1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.31%, AIQ +1 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1IBIT closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 47 points behind, the largest single contributor to VXUS's edge.
- 2IBIT's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3VXUS's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | IBIT | VXUS |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.9% | -0.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -4.3% | -4.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 25.1% | -0.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 9.9% | 2.3% |
| Year to date | -5.9% | 11% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -24% | 12.8% |
Technicals
IBIT has the stronger structure| Metric | IBIT | VXUS |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 45.6 | 41.4 |
| ADX (14) | 22 | 19.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | 7.5% | -2.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 11.9% | 0.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 21.7% | 12.1% |
Risk
VXUS is the more resilient| Metric | IBIT | VXUS |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.77 | 1.11 |
| Sharpe ratio | -0.44 | 0.56 |
| Sortino ratio | -0.69 | 0.83 |
| Max drawdown | -48.4% | -11.4% |
| Current drawdown | -27.6% | -5.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 45.1% | 17.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4% | -1.7% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between IBIT and VXUS?
VXUS holds 8,821 positions to IBIT's 2.
Which ETF is more diversified, IBIT or VXUS?
VXUS holds more positions: 8,821 versus 2 for IBIT.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
VXUS has the lower expense ratio, 0.05% a year against 0.25% for IBIT.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
IBIT has been more volatile over the past year, at 45.1% annualized against 17.2% for VXUS.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
VXUS fell less from peak to trough over the past year: -11.4% against -48.4% for IBIT.
Compare IBIT and VXUS with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.