SOXX vs VGT: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
SOXX and VGT are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. SOXX is iShares Semiconductor ETF, while VGT is Vanguard Information Technology ETF. VGT is broader by holdings count, with 322 positions versus 33 for SOXX. VGT has the lower expense ratio. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has VGT ahead on AIQ Score, 48 versus 36.
What is the main difference between SOXX and VGT?
VGT holds 322 positions to SOXX's 33, and 32% of their weight is in the same securities.
| Metric | SOXX | VGT |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.33% | 0.09% |
| Holdings | 33 | 322 |
| Top-10 concentration | 62.6% | 62.4% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 0.25% | 0.39% |
| Average volume | 8,752,412 | 4,245,287 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | +73.9% | +28.2% |
| YTD return | +66% | +27.6% |
| 5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested | +27.6% | +18.4% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 46% | 25% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -29% | -16.6% |
| Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested | -45.8% | -35.1% |
| Beta | 2.62 | 1.71 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.35 | 0.96 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.97 | 1.52 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 36/100 | 48/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 2/10 | 3/10 |
| Momentum | 15/100 | 32/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 23/100 | 63/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
iShares Semiconductor ETF vs Vanguard Information Technology ETF
VGT leads
VGT leads by 12 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 5 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 4 of 4 evidence groups support VGT, its lead is widening, and its current signal state is conflicted.
iShares Semiconductor ETF
Vanguard Information Technology ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VGT over SOXX, 48 versus 36 as of Oct 21, 2026. VGT's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum. VGT also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 4 covered evidence groups favor VGT today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: the leader is throwing conflicting signals. VGT lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
Compare iShares Semiconductor ETF and Vanguard Information Technology ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
SOXX vs VGT: 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 | SOXX | VGT | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.33% | 0.09% | VGT |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 33 | 322 | VGT |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 62.6% | 62.4% | Similar |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 0.25% | 0.39% | Similar |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years | -45.8% | -35.1% | VGT |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 46% | 25% | VGT |
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 SOXX and VGT 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 Resilience23 vs 63VGT +40
- Momentum15 vs 32VGT +17
- Value25 vs 32VGT +7
- Quality70 vs 71Even
4 of 4 evidence groups favor VGT. VGT’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and momentum.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Risk Resilience +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -2
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
VGT's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SOXX and VGT 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 | SOXX | VGT | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.33% | 0.09% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 33 | 322 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 8,752,412 | 4,245,287 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 46% | 25% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -29% | -16.6% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.35 | 0.96 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 2.62 | 1.71 | 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
SOXX and VGT share 31.58% of their weighted exposure across 23 common holdings.
7 holdings are unique to SOXX, and 296 holdings are unique to VGT. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
SOXX is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 62.57% of the fund, against 62.39% for VGT (33 holdings vs 322). 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 | SOXX | VGT | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANVIDIA Corp | 9.18% | 17.16% | 9.18% |
| AVGOBROADCOM INC | 7.07% | 4.21% | 4.21% |
| MUMICRON TECHNOLOGY | 9.17% | 3.82% | 3.82% |
| AMDADVANCED MICRO DEVICES | 8.75% | 3.18% | 3.18% |
| AMATAPPLIED MATERIAL INC | 4.51% | 1.69% | 1.69% |
| INTCINTEL CORPORATION | 5.81% | 1.65% | 1.65% |
| LRCXLAM RESEARCH | 4.3% | 1.54% | 1.54% |
| TXNTEXAS INSTRUMENT INC | 3.71% | 1.07% | 1.07% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What SOXX adds that VGT doesn’t
| Holding | SOXX | VGT |
|---|---|---|
| MUMICRON TECHNOLOGY | 9.17% | 3.82% |
| AMDADVANCED MICRO DEVICES | 8.75% | 3.18% |
| INTCINTEL CORPORATION | 5.81% | 1.65% |
| MRVLMARVELL TECHNOLOGY | 4.97% | 0.7% |
| TSMTAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING | 4.69% | Not held |
| AMATAPPLIED MATERIAL INC | 4.51% | 1.69% |
What VGT adds that SOXX doesn’t
| Holding | VGT | SOXX |
|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple Inc | 16.26% | Not held |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 10.96% | Not held |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc | 1.91% | Not held |
| PANWPalo Alto Networks Inc | 1.16% | Not held |
| PLTRPalantir Technologies Inc | 1.14% | Not held |
| ORCLOracle Corp | 0.9% | 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.
SOXX vs VGT: five-year payout growth
SOXX grew its split-adjusted payout faster over 2020-2025 — 10.93% a year against VGT's 0.91%.
| Dividend metric | SOXX | VGT |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y payout CAGR | 10.93% | 0.91% |
| 2020 annual payout | $0.342 | $0.364 |
| 2025 annual payout | $0.574 | $0.381 |
| Calendar-year declines | 1 | 2 |
| Peer rank | #53 of 138 | #126 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
4 of 4 covered evidence groups favor VGT. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | VGT | 36 vs 48 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | VGT | Value 25 vs 32 |
| Technicals | VGT | Price vs 50-day -4.8% vs -0.2%; vs 200-day 6.5% vs 10.9% |
| Risk Resilience | VGT | Risk Resilience 23 vs 63 |
| 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 SOXX and VGT and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 12 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 4 of 4 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 VGT.
How the comparison changed
100 daily snapshots · Jun 22 – Oct 20VGT lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 12 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- VGT +12
- 36 vs 48
- 7 sessions ago
- VGT +14
- 35 vs 49
- 30 sessions ago
- VGT +5
- 53 vs 58
- 90 sessions ago
- VGT +12
- 45 vs 57
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Sep 8 when VGT moved ahead of SOXX.
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 / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only SOXX
- ATR Expansion - Breakout Mode — neutral, volatility, short horizon (3.60%)
- RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
No signal that the other name lacks.
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, Keltner Channel Breakdown, MACD Bearish Crossover.
VGT 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +2.07%, AIQ 0 points).
Price is up while the AIQ Score moved down 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price +1.71%, 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.
- 1SOXX closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 40 points behind, the largest single contributor to VGT's edge.
- 2SOXX's Keltner Channel Breakdown resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3VGT's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 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
VGT leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | SOXX | VGT |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -8.1% | -5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -12.7% | -4.9% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -10% | 4% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 18.9% | 19% |
| Year to date | 66% | 27.6% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 73.9% | 28.2% |
Technicals
VGT has the stronger structure| Metric | SOXX | VGT |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 24.2 | 35 |
| ADX (14) | 22 | 21.2 |
| Price vs 50-day | -4.8% | -0.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 6.5% | 10.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 30% | 18.8% |
Risk
VGT is the more resilient| Metric | SOXX | VGT |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 2.62 | 1.71 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.35 | 0.96 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.97 | 1.52 |
| Max drawdown | -29% | -16.6% |
| Current drawdown | -23.7% | -7.4% |
| Annualized volatility | 46% | 25% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -4.8% | -2.4% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between SOXX and VGT?
VGT holds 322 positions to SOXX's 33, and 32% of their weight is in the same securities.
How much do SOXX and VGT overlap?
SOXX and VGT share 31.58% of their weighted exposure across 23 common holdings. 7 holdings are unique to SOXX, and 296 holdings are unique to VGT. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Which ETF is more diversified, SOXX or VGT?
VGT holds more positions: 322 versus 33 for SOXX.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
VGT has the lower expense ratio, 0.09% a year against 0.33% for SOXX.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
Their trailing 12-month distribution yields are similar: 0.25% for SOXX and 0.39% for VGT.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
SOXX has been more volatile over the past year, at 46% annualized against 25% for VGT.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
VGT fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -35.1% against -45.8% for SOXX.
Compare SOXX and VGT 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.