SPYV vs VONV: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
SPYV and VONV are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. SPYV is State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Value ETF, while VONV is Vanguard Russell 1000 Value ETF. VONV is broader by holdings count, with 875 positions versus 440 for SPYV. VONV is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight.
| Metric | SPYV | VONV |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.04% | 0.06% |
| Holdings | 440 | 875 |
| Top-10 concentration | 24.1% | 28.8% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 1.68% | 1.54% |
| Average volume | 2,282,631 | 776,391 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | +13% | +26% |
| YTD return | +11% | +22.3% |
| 5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested | +11% | +11.2% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 10.1% | 11.6% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -6.6% | -7.2% |
| Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested | -17.9% | -18.9% |
| Beta | 0.57 | 0.68 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.94 | 1.77 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.36 | 2.72 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 60/100 | 60/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 8/10 | 8/10 |
| Momentum | 62/100 | 65/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 78/100 | 78/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Value ETF vs Vanguard Russell 1000 Value ETF
SPYV and VONV are effectively level
SPYV and VONV are effectively level on the AIQ Score; the factor table below shows where each one holds its advantage.
State Street SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 Value ETF
Vanguard Russell 1000 Value ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score does not currently separate SPYV and VONV as of Nov 7, 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 500 Value ETF and Vanguard Russell 1000 Value ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
SPYV vs VONV: 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 | SPYV | VONV | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.04% | 0.06% | SPYV |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 440 | 875 | VONV |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 24.1% | 28.8% | SPYV |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 1.68% | 1.54% | Similar |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years | -17.9% | -18.9% | Similar |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 10.1% | 11.6% | SPYV |
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 SPYV and VONV 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.
- Quality65 vs 59SPYV +6
- Value45 vs 48Even
- Momentum62 vs 65Even
- Risk Resilience78 vs 78Even
Neither name separates cleanly on the covered dimensions.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-11-06, compared against the prior scored session 2026-11-05.
Largest factor move: Value +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Value +1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
New signals
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SPYV and VONV 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 | SPYV | VONV | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.04% | 0.06% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 440 | 875 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 2,282,631 | 776,391 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 10.1% | 11.6% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -6.6% | -7.2% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.94 | 1.77 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 0.57 | 0.68 | 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
SPYV and VONV share 69.13% of their weighted exposure across 394 common holdings.
44 holdings are unique to SPYV, and 478 holdings are unique to VONV. Owning both is a partial overlap: a majority of the capital is distinct, but the largest positions are shared.
VONV is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 28.83% of the fund, against 24.06% for SPYV (875 holdings vs 440). 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 | SPYV | VONV | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLAPPLE INC | 8.06% | 5.54% | 5.54% |
| AMZNAmazon.com Inc | 3.9% | 6.53% | 3.9% |
| XOMEXXONMOBIL HOLDINGS CORP | 2.3% | 1.75% | 1.75% |
| WMTWALMART INC | 1.56% | 1.21% | 1.21% |
| INTCINTEL CORP | 1.67% | 1.07% | 1.07% |
| BACBANK OF AMERICA CORP | 1.37% | 1.03% | 1.03% |
| JPMJPMorgan Chase & Co | 1.02% | 2.54% | 1.02% |
| UNHUNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC | 1.19% | 1.01% | 1.01% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What SPYV adds that VONV doesn’t
| Holding | SPYV | VONV |
|---|---|---|
| COSTCOSTCO WHOLESALE CORP | 1.35% | 0.64% |
| TSLATESLA INC | 1.31% | Not held |
| HDHOME DEPOT INC | 1.02% | 0.23% |
| VVISA INC CLASS A SHARES | 0.92% | Not held |
| TXNTEXAS INSTRUMENTS INC | 0.79% | Not held |
| GEGENERAL ELECTRIC | 0.55% | Not held |
What VONV adds that SPYV doesn’t
| Holding | VONV | SPYV |
|---|---|---|
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 4.67% | Not held |
| BRK-BBerkshire Hathaway Inc | 2.58% | Not held |
| JPMJPMorgan Chase & Co | 2.54% | 1.02% |
| RTXRTX Corp | 0.79% | Not held |
| GSGoldman Sachs Group Inc/The | 0.76% | 0.35% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 0.6% | 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.
SPYV vs VONV: five-year payout growth
VONV grew its split-adjusted payout faster over 2020-2025 — 4.52% a year against SPYV's 4.13%.
| Dividend metric | SPYV | VONV |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y payout CAGR | 4.13% | 4.52% |
| 2020 annual payout | $0.819 | $1.348 |
| 2025 annual payout | $1.003 | $1.682 |
| Calendar-year declines | 3 | 1 |
| Peer rank | #106 of 138 | #102 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 | 60 vs 60 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | Even | Value 45 vs 48 |
| Technicals | VONV | Price vs 50-day 0.2% vs 0.9%; vs 200-day 3.8% vs 7.5% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 78 vs 78 |
| 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 lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jul 8 – Nov 6SPYV lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 0 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- Level
- 60 vs 60
- 7 sessions ago
- SPYV +3
- 66 vs 63
- 30 sessions ago
- SPYV +1
- 64 vs 63
- 90 sessions ago
- SPYV +1
- 61 vs 60
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Sep 21 when VONV moved ahead of SPYV.
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.
SPYV and VONV carry the same 6 signals, so the signals do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Golden Cross Active, ATR Contraction - Coiling, EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish, Uptrend Structure Active, MACD Bearish Crossover.
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 -0.39%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.38%, AIQ 0 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
VONV leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | SPYV | VONV |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.7% | -0.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 1.1% | 1.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -0.3% | 0% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 4.9% | 10% |
| Year to date | 11% | 22.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 13% | 26% |
Technicals
VONV has the stronger structure| Metric | SPYV | VONV |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 50.6 | 53.6 |
| ADX (14) | 29.3 | 23.8 |
| Price vs 50-day | 0.2% | 0.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | 3.8% | 7.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 14.4% | 15% |
Risk
Split| Metric | SPYV | VONV |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.57 | 0.68 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.94 | 1.77 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.36 | 2.72 |
| Max drawdown | -6.6% | -7.2% |
| Current drawdown | -3.2% | -3% |
| Annualized volatility | 10.1% | 11.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1% | -1.1% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
How much do SPYV and VONV overlap?
SPYV and VONV share 69.13% of their weighted exposure across 394 common holdings. 44 holdings are unique to SPYV, and 478 holdings are unique to VONV. Owning both is a partial overlap: a majority of the capital is distinct, but the largest positions are shared.
Which ETF is more diversified, SPYV or VONV?
VONV holds more positions: 875 versus 440 for SPYV.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
SPYV has the lower expense ratio, 0.04% a year against 0.06% for VONV.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
Their trailing 12-month distribution yields are similar: 1.68% for SPYV and 1.54% for VONV.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
VONV has been more volatile over the past year, at 11.6% annualized against 10.1% for SPYV.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
Their worst peak-to-trough falls over the past five years are similar: -17.9% for SPYV and -18.9% for VONV.
Compare SPYV and VONV 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.