SPMD vs VB: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk

SPMD and VB are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. SPMD is State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 400 Mid Cap ETF, while VB is Vanguard Morningstar Small-Cap ETF. VB is broader by holdings count, with 1,314 positions versus 403 for SPMD. SPMD is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight.

Market data as of Oct 21, 2026 market close· Fund characteristics as of Oct 21, 2026
SPMD
SPDR
vs
VB
Vanguard
SPMD
State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 400 Mid Cap ETF
Issuer
SPDR
Inception
2005-11-08
VB
Vanguard Morningstar Small-Cap ETF
Issuer
Vanguard
Inception
2004-01-26

What is the main difference between SPMD and VB?

VB holds 1,314 positions to SPMD's 403, and 44% of their weight is in the same securities.

Expense ratio
SPMD
0.03%
VB
0.03%
Lower annual fund cost
Holdings
SPMD
403
VB
1,314
Broader reported basketVB
1Y return
SPMD
+13.6%
VB
+13.8%
Trailing performanceVB
Annualized volatility
SPMD
15.1%
VB
15.9%
Lower realized volatilitySPMD
MetricSPMDVB
Fund
Expense ratio0.03%0.03%
Holdings4031,314
Top-10 concentration7.8%4.1%
Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months1.31%1.27%
Average volume1,537,217510,292
Performance
1Y return+13.6%+13.8%
YTD return+10.6%+11.7%
5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested+7%+6%
Risk
Annualized volatility15.1%15.9%
Max drawdown (1Y)-9.2%-9.3%
Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested-24.1%-28.2%
Beta0.951.03
Sharpe ratio0.650.65
Sortino ratio1.091.07
AlgovestIQ
AIQ Score60/10060/100
AIQ Edge Score8/108/10
Momentum55/10054/100
Risk Resilience83/10080/100

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 400 Mid Cap ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Small-Cap ETF

Data as of Oct 21, 2026· market close· Broad Market / Index· Coverage 64/66 fields· High confidence
AIQ VerdictFragileAIQ Comparison Conviction 1/10

SPMD and VB are effectively level

SPMD and VB are effectively level on the AIQ Score; the factor table below shows where each one holds its advantage.

Evidence agreement: 0 of 4Comparison trend: Stable
SPMD

State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 400 Mid Cap ETF

AIQ Score
60/100
AIQ Edge Score
8/10
VB

Vanguard Morningstar Small-Cap ETF

AIQ Score
60/100
AIQ Edge Score
8/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score does not currently separate SPMD and VB 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 State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 400 Mid Cap ETF and Vanguard Morningstar Small-Cap ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.

SPMD vs VB: 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 wantSPMDVBFits
Lower costExpense ratio0.03%0.03%Similar
Broader diversificationNumber of holdings4031,314VB
Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings7.8%4.1%VB
Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield1.31%1.27%Similar
Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years-24.1%-28.2%SPMD
Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year15.1%15.9%Similar

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.

Currently unavailable

Performance over time

Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes for both ETFs.

SPMD
+40.2%
VB
+33.9%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested

SPMD $14,023 · VB $13,393

Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.

Compare SPMD and VB against another ticker

Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.

Basic: 2 symbols·Explorer: 3 symbols·Pro and Premium: 5 symbols·Your limit: 2

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.

SPMD advantage
0
VB advantage
  • Quality61 vs 64
    Even
  • Risk Resilience83 vs 80
    Even
  • Momentum55 vs 54
    Even
  • Value51 vs 51
    Even

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.

SPMD+3 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum +13

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.

VB+4 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum +15

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.

SPMD's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.

Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SPMD and VB 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.

MeasureSPMDVBWhy it matters
Expense ratio0.03%0.03%Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold.
Holdings4031,314More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns.
Average volume1,537,217510,292Liquidity — matters most if you trade size.
Annualized volatility15.1%15.9%Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure.
Max drawdown (1Y)-9.2%-9.3%The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year.
Sharpe ratio0.650.65Return per unit of risk. Higher is better.
Beta0.951.03Sensitivity 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.

Industrials23.7% vs 17.7%
Healthcare10.3% vs 13.8%
Technology14.5% vs 17.8%
Financial Services15.0% vs 12.8%
Communication Services1.6% vs 3.1%
Basic Materials5.8% vs 4.6%
Consumer Cyclical10.2% vs 11.3%
Energy5.5% vs 4.6%
SPMDVB

How much of the same holdings they own

SPMD and VB share 43.63% of their weighted exposure across 397 common holdings.

4 holdings are unique to SPMD, and 908 holdings are unique to VB. Owning both is a partial overlap: a majority of the capital is distinct, but the largest positions are shared.

SPMD is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 7.8% of the fund, against 4.08% for VB (403 holdings vs 1,314). 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

HoldingSPMDVBShared
ILMNILLUMINA INC0.87%0.37%0.37%
TWLOTWILIO INC A1%0.37%0.37%
FTITECHNIPFMC PLC0.86%0.35%0.35%
CWCURTISS WRIGHT CORP0.59%0.33%0.33%
ATIATI INC0.78%0.32%0.32%
NVTNVENT ELECTRIC PLC0.72%0.31%0.31%
CRSCARPENTER TECHNOLOGY0.64%0.3%0.3%
OKTAOKTA INC0.82%0.3%0.3%

Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.

What SPMD adds that VB doesn’t

HoldingSPMDVB
TWLOTWILIO INC A1%0.37%
ILMNILLUMINA INC0.87%0.37%
FTITECHNIPFMC PLC0.86%0.35%
PEVERPURE INC A0.85%0.3%
OKTAOKTA INC0.82%0.3%
ATIATI INC0.78%0.32%

What VB adds that SPMD doesn’t

HoldingVBSPMD
RVMDRevolution Medicines Inc0.47%Not held
NTRANatera Inc0.45%Not held
EMEEMCOR Group Inc0.44%Not held
CRDOCredo Technology Group Holding Ltd0.43%Not held
JBLJabil Inc0.41%Not held
CASYCasey's General Stores Inc0.4%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.

SPMD vs VB: five-year payout growth

VB grew its split-adjusted payout faster over 2020-2025 — 9.10% a year against SPMD's 8.89%. SPMD never reduced its annual distribution in the window; VB did in 1 year.

Dividend metricSPMDVB
5Y payout CAGR8.89%9.10%
2020 annual payout$0.525$2.225
2025 annual payout$0.804$3.439
Calendar-year declines01
Peer rank#64 of 138#63 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 groupFavorsReading
AIQ ScoreEven60 vs 60
FundamentalsNot coveredNot covered
ValuationEvenValue 51 vs 51
TechnicalsEvenPrice vs 50-day -1.6% vs -1.8%; vs 200-day 0.3% vs 0.9%
Risk ResilienceEvenRisk Resilience 83 vs 80
Analyst expectationsNot coveredNot covered

AIQ Decision Stability

Fragile

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 lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)

How the comparison changed

120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20

VB lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 0 points over 30 sessions.

Jun 21SPMD leads above the line · VB leads belowOct 20
Today
Level
60 vs 60
7 sessions ago
Level
58 vs 58
30 sessions ago
VB +2
53 vs 55
90 sessions ago
Level
64 vs 64

The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Aug 3 when VB moved ahead of SPMD.

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.

SPMD

2 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral

Only SPMD

  • Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
VB

2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral

No signal that the other name lacks.

Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, ATR Contraction - Coiling, MACD Bullish Crossover.

Price vs model alignment

Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.

SPMDConfirmed strength

Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.39%, AIQ +3 points).

VBConfirmed strength

Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.44%, AIQ +4 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

VB leads 5 of 6 windows
MetricSPMDVB
1 week (5 sessions)-0.2%0%
1 month (20 sessions)-0.5%-1.5%
3 months (63 sessions)-3.5%-2.8%
6 months (126 sessions)0.2%1.4%
Year to date10.6%11.7%
1 year (252 sessions)13.6%13.8%

Technicals

Split
MetricSPMDVB
RSI (14)57.655.8
ADX (14)39.935.8
Price vs 50-day-1.6%-1.8%
Price vs 200-day0.3%0.9%
Volatility (1M, annualized)12.6%13.8%

Risk

Split
MetricSPMDVB
Beta0.951.03
Sharpe ratio0.650.65
Sortino ratio1.091.07
Max drawdown-9.2%-9.3%
Current drawdown-7.1%-6.9%
Annualized volatility15.1%15.9%
Value at risk (95%)-1.6%-1.6%

Straight answers

Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.

What is the difference between SPMD and VB?

VB holds 1,314 positions to SPMD's 403, and 44% of their weight is in the same securities.

How much do SPMD and VB overlap?

SPMD and VB share 43.63% of their weighted exposure across 397 common holdings. 4 holdings are unique to SPMD, and 908 holdings are unique to VB. Owning both is a partial overlap: a majority of the capital is distinct, but the largest positions are shared.

Which ETF is more diversified, SPMD or VB?

VB holds more positions: 1,314 versus 403 for SPMD.

Which has the lower expense ratio?

Neither: both charge 0.03% a year.

Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?

Their trailing 12-month distribution yields are similar: 1.31% for SPMD and 1.27% for VB.

Which ETF has been more volatile?

Their volatility over the past year is similar: 15.1% annualized for SPMD and 15.9% for VB.

Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?

SPMD fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -24.1% against -28.2% for VB.

Compare SPMD and VB 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.