IJR vs VXUS: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
IJR and VXUS are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. IJR is iShares Core S&P Small-Cap ETF, while VXUS is Vanguard Total International Stock ETF. VXUS is broader by holdings count, with 8,821 positions versus 612 for IJR. VXUS is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight.
What is the main difference between IJR and VXUS?
VXUS holds 8,821 positions to IJR's 612, and 0% of their weight is in the same securities.
| Metric | IJR | VXUS |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.06% | 0.05% |
| Holdings | 612 | 8,821 |
| Top-10 concentration | 5.2% | 12.9% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 1.24% | 2.37% |
| Average volume | 3,376,029 | 5,459,776 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | +16.9% | +12.8% |
| YTD return | +14.5% | +11% |
| 5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested | +5.4% | +8.3% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 16% | 17.2% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -10% | -11.4% |
| Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested | -28% | -28.9% |
| Beta | 0.94 | 1.11 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.83 | 0.56 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.46 | 0.83 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 63/100 | 63/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 9/10 | 9/10 |
| Momentum | 54/100 | 41/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 81/100 | 82/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
iShares Core S&P Small-Cap ETF vs Vanguard Total International Stock ETF
IJR and VXUS are effectively level
IJR and VXUS are effectively level on the AIQ Score; the factor table below shows where each one holds its advantage.
iShares Core S&P Small-Cap ETF
Vanguard Total International Stock ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score does not currently separate IJR and VXUS as of Oct 21, 2026. Both names are scored on the same 0–100 scale across Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk Resilience, and the factor table below shows where each one holds its advantage.
Compare iShares Core S&P Small-Cap ETF and Vanguard Total International Stock ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
IJR 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 | IJR | VXUS | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.06% | 0.05% | Similar |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 612 | 8,821 | VXUS |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 5.2% | 12.9% | IJR |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 1.24% | 2.37% | VXUS |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years | -28% | -28.9% | Similar |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 16% | 17.2% | IJR |
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 IJR 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.
- Momentum54 vs 41IJR +13
- Quality69 vs 76VXUS +7
- Value55 vs 59VXUS +4
- Risk Resilience81 vs 82Even
Neither name separates cleanly on the covered dimensions.
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 +16
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 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 narrowed by 3 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — IJR and VXUS both carry a full feed there.
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 | IJR | VXUS | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.06% | 0.05% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 612 | 8,821 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 3,376,029 | 5,459,776 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 16% | 17.2% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -10% | -11.4% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.83 | 0.56 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 0.94 | 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.
How much of the same holdings they own
IJR and VXUS share 0.01% of their weighted exposure across 6 common holdings.
598 holdings are unique to IJR, and 8,275 holdings are unique to VXUS. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
VXUS is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 12.94% of the fund, against 5.18% for IJR (8,821 holdings vs 612). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.
Largest shared positions
| Holding | IJR | VXUS | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| MCYMERCURY GENERAL | 0.15% | 0.01% | 0.01% |
| DMCDEL MONTE | 0.05% | 0% | 0% |
| IPARINTERPARFUMS INC | 0.11% | 0% | 0% |
| CTSCTS CORP | 0.09% | 0% | 0% |
| AGXARGAN | 0.43% | 0% | 0% |
| PLUSEPLUS | 0.12% | 0% | 0% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What IJR adds that VXUS doesn’t
| Holding | IJR | VXUS |
|---|---|---|
| CORTCORCEPT THERAPEUTICS | 0.58% | Not held |
| VSATVIASAT INC | 0.57% | Not held |
| GKOSGLAUKOS | 0.57% | Not held |
| FORMFORMFACTOR INC | 0.56% | Not held |
| EATBRINKER INTERNATIONAL INC | 0.54% | Not held |
| PTGXPROTAGONIST THERAPEUTICS | 0.5% | Not held |
What VXUS adds that IJR doesn’t
| Holding | VXUS | IJR |
|---|---|---|
| 2330.TWTaiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd | 4.02% | Not held |
| 005930.KSSamsung Electronics Co Ltd | 1.8% | Not held |
| ASML.ASASML Holding NV | 1.42% | Not held |
| 000660.KSSK hynix Inc | 1.41% | Not held |
| 0700.HKTencent Holdings Ltd | 0.85% | Not held |
| HSBA.LHSBC Holdings PLC | 0.82% | Not held |
Each list is a fund’s largest positions by weight that the other fund does not hold, or holds at less than half the weight.
IJR vs VXUS: five-year payout growth
VXUS grew its split-adjusted payout faster over 2020-2025 — 13.28% a year against IJR's 11.03%. IJR: The 2020 payout was 15.2% below 2019, so the growth rate measures a recovery from a weak starting year. IJR: The payout jumped 71.3% in 2021, a single step rather than steady compounding - often an index or mandate change. VXUS: The 2020 payout was 24.6% below 2019, so the growth rate measures a recovery from a weak starting year. VXUS: The payout jumped 53.0% in 2021, a single step rather than steady compounding - often an index or mandate change. VXUS: A single payment in an endpoint year was 3.9x the fund's median payment, so one distribution carries much of the result.
| Dividend metric | IJR | VXUS |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y payout CAGR | 11.03% | 13.28% |
| 2020 annual payout | $1.024 | $1.286 |
| 2025 annual payout | $1.727 | $2.399 |
| Calendar-year declines | 2 | 1 |
| Peer rank | #52 of 138 | #43 of 138 |
Split-adjusted annual distributions, 2020–2025. Research as of Sep 19, 2026. Yield and expense ratio above are current values, not part of this window.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
How each independent group of evidence reads the pair.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 63 vs 63 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | VXUS | Value 55 vs 59 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day -2.8% vs -2.6%; vs 200-day 0.8% vs 0.6% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 81 vs 82 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
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 0 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 0 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20VXUS lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 0 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- Level
- 63 vs 63
- 7 sessions ago
- Level
- 61 vs 61
- 30 sessions ago
- VXUS +5
- 57 vs 62
- 90 sessions ago
- VXUS +4
- 67 vs 71
The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Aug 3 when VXUS moved ahead of IJR.
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.
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral
Only IJR
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only VXUS
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Golden Cross Active, ATR Contraction - Coiling.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.09%, AIQ +4 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.31%, AIQ +1 points).
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
IJR leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | IJR | VXUS |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 0% | -0.9% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1.5% | -4.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -5.6% | -0.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 1.9% | 2.3% |
| Year to date | 14.5% | 11% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 16.9% | 12.8% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | IJR | VXUS |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 56.3 | 41.4 |
| ADX (14) | 39.3 | 19.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2.8% | -2.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0.8% | 0.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 13.1% | 12.1% |
Risk
Split| Metric | IJR | VXUS |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.94 | 1.11 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.83 | 0.56 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.46 | 0.83 |
| Max drawdown | -10% | -11.4% |
| Current drawdown | -8.5% | -5.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 16% | 17.2% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.6% | -1.7% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between IJR and VXUS?
VXUS holds 8,821 positions to IJR's 612, and 0% of their weight is in the same securities.
How much do IJR and VXUS overlap?
IJR and VXUS share 0.01% of their weighted exposure across 6 common holdings. 598 holdings are unique to IJR, and 8,275 holdings are unique to VXUS. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Which ETF is more diversified, IJR or VXUS?
VXUS holds more positions: 8,821 versus 612 for IJR.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
The two are within a basis point: 0.06% for IJR and 0.05% for VXUS.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
VXUS, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 2.37% against 1.24% for IJR.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
VXUS has been more volatile over the past year, at 17.2% annualized against 16% for IJR.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
Their worst peak-to-trough falls over the past five years are similar: -28% for IJR and -28.9% for VXUS.
Compare IJR 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.