SRLN vs VCLT: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk

SRLN and VCLT are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. SRLN is State Street Blackstone Senior Loan ETF, while VCLT is Vanguard Long-Term Corporate Bond ETF. VCLT is broader by holdings count, with 2,745 positions versus 717 for SRLN. VCLT has the lower expense ratio. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has VCLT ahead on AIQ Score, 56 versus 45.

Market data as of Oct 21, 2026 market close· Fund characteristics as of Oct 21, 2026
SRLN
SPDR
vs
VCLT
Vanguard
SRLN
State Street Blackstone Senior Loan ETF
Issuer
SPDR
Inception
2013-04-03
VCLT
Vanguard Long-Term Corporate Bond ETF
Issuer
Vanguard
Inception
2009-11-19

What is the main difference between SRLN and VCLT?

VCLT holds 2,745 positions to SRLN's 717.

Expense ratio
SRLN
0.7%
VCLT
0.03%
Lower annual fund costVCLT
Holdings
SRLN
717
VCLT
2,745
Broader reported basketVCLT
1Y return
SRLN
-2.9%
VCLT
-11.2%
Trailing performanceSRLN
Annualized volatility
SRLN
3.5%
VCLT
8.4%
Lower realized volatilitySRLN
MetricSRLNVCLT
Fund
Expense ratio0.7%0.03%
Holdings7172,745
Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months7.37%5.92%
Average volume1,902,2325,024,127
Performance
1Y return-2.9%-11.2%
YTD return-3.3%-8%
5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested+4.7%-3.3%
Risk
Annualized volatility3.5%8.4%
Max drawdown (1Y)-4.7%-14%
Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested-7.9%-34.2%
Beta0.140.30
Sharpe ratio-1.99-1.82
Sortino ratio-2.32-2.55
AlgovestIQ
AIQ Score45/10056/100
AIQ Edge Score3/106/10
Momentum25/10057/100
Risk Resilience64/10055/100

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

State Street Blackstone Senior Loan ETF vs Vanguard Long-Term Corporate Bond ETF

Data as of Oct 21, 2026· market close· Fixed Income — Credit & Aggregate· Coverage 64/66 fields· High confidence
AIQ VerdictFragileAIQ Comparison Conviction 5/10

VCLT leads

VCLT leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from SRLN.

Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support VCLT, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.

Evidence agreement: 2 of 4Comparison trend: Reversed
SRLN

State Street Blackstone Senior Loan ETF

AIQ Score
45/100
AIQ Edge Score
3/10
VCLT

Vanguard Long-Term Corporate Bond ETF

Leads
AIQ Score
56/100
AIQ Edge Score
6/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VCLT over SRLN, 56 versus 45 as of Oct 21, 2026. VCLT's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while SRLN holds the stronger risk resilience profile. VCLT also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor VCLT today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. VCLT lead: Reversed — SRLN led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; VCLT now leads by 11.

Compare State Street Blackstone Senior Loan ETF and Vanguard Long-Term Corporate Bond ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.

SRLN vs VCLT: 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 wantSRLNVCLTFits
Lower costExpense ratio0.7%0.03%VCLT
Broader diversificationNumber of holdings7172,745VCLT
Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield7.37%5.92%SRLN
Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years-7.9%-34.2%SRLN
Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year3.5%8.4%SRLN

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.

SRLN
+25.6%
VCLT
-15.5%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested

SRLN $12,558 · VCLT $8,450

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

Compare SRLN and VCLT 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.

SRLN advantage
0
VCLT advantage
  • Momentum25 vs 57
    VCLT +32
  • Value36 vs 45
    VCLT +9
  • Risk Resilience64 vs 55
    SRLN +9
  • Quality60 vs 65
    VCLT +5

2 of 4 evidence groups favor VCLT. VCLT’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; SRLN keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.

What changed since the last close

Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.

SRLN0 AIQ

No factor moved materially.

New signals

  • Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (0.00%)
  • Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
VCLT+2 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum +8

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.

VCLT's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.

Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SRLN and VCLT both carry a full feed there.

The central trade-off

VCLT (Vanguard Long-Term Corporate Bond ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.

SRLN (State Street Blackstone Senior Loan ETF): the counter-case, on risk resilience, technicals.

Fund facts, side by side

Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.

MeasureSRLNVCLTWhy it matters
Expense ratio0.7%0.03%Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold.
Holdings7172,745More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns.
Average volume1,902,2325,024,127Liquidity — matters most if you trade size.
Annualized volatility3.5%8.4%Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure.
Max drawdown (1Y)-4.7%-14%The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year.
Sharpe ratio-1.99-1.82Return per unit of risk. Higher is better.
Beta0.140.30Sensitivity 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.

Communication Services91.8% vs 0.0%
Industrials8.2% vs 0.0%
Cash & Others0.0% vs 100.0%
SRLNVCLT

AIQ Agreement Matrix

2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor VCLT. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.

Evidence groupFavorsReading
AIQ ScoreVCLT45 vs 56
FundamentalsNot coveredNot covered
ValuationVCLTValue 36 vs 45
TechnicalsSRLNPrice vs 50-day -1.3% vs -1.1%; vs 200-day -1.4% vs -5.6%
Risk ResilienceSRLNRisk Resilience 64 vs 55
Analyst expectationsNot coveredNot covered

✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SRLN and VCLT and are excluded from the count.

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 moderate at 11 points.
  • Only 2 of 4 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 VCLT.

How the comparison changed

120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20

VCLT lead: Reversed — SRLN led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; VCLT now leads by 11.

Jun 21SRLN leads above the line · VCLT leads belowOct 20
Today
VCLT +11
45 vs 56
7 sessions ago
VCLT +8
45 vs 53
30 sessions ago
SRLN +1
48 vs 47
90 sessions ago
SRLN +7
55 vs 48

The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Aug 5 when SRLN moved ahead of VCLT.

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.

SRLNConflicted

1 bullish / 5 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted

Only SRLN

  • Keltner Channel Breakdown — bearish, volatility, short horizon
  • RSI Oversold - Potential Bounce — bullish, momentum, short horizon
  • MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
VCLTConflicted

1 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted

Only VCLT

  • Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
  • MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon

Both carry 4 more signals that do not separate them: Death Cross Active, ATR Contraction - Coiling, 52-Week Low Proximity, Downtrend Structure Active.

VCLT 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.

SRLNNo material change

Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.05%, AIQ 0 points).

VCLTNo material change

Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.07%, AIQ +2 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.

  1. 1SRLN closes the Momentum gap — currently 32 points behind, the largest single contributor to VCLT's edge.
  2. 2SRLN's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
  3. 3VCLT's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 3 bearish rules at once.
  4. 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

SRLN leads 5 of 6 windows
MetricSRLNVCLT
1 week (5 sessions)-0.6%1.3%
1 month (20 sessions)-2%-2.7%
3 months (63 sessions)-1.1%-4%
6 months (126 sessions)-1.4%-7.4%
Year to date-3.3%-8%
1 year (252 sessions)-2.9%-11.2%

Technicals

SRLN has the stronger structure
MetricSRLNVCLT
RSI (14)2567.8
ADX (14)48.527.7
Price vs 50-day-1.3%-1.1%
Price vs 200-day-1.4%-5.6%
Volatility (1M, annualized)2.8%10.5%

Risk

SRLN is the more resilient
MetricSRLNVCLT
Beta0.140.3
Sharpe ratio-1.99-1.82
Sortino ratio-2.32-2.55
Max drawdown-4.7%-14%
Current drawdown-3.9%-11.9%
Annualized volatility3.5%8.4%
Value at risk (95%)-0.4%-0.9%

Straight answers

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

What is the difference between SRLN and VCLT?

VCLT holds 2,745 positions to SRLN's 717.

Which ETF is more diversified, SRLN or VCLT?

VCLT holds more positions: 2,745 versus 717 for SRLN.

Which has the lower expense ratio?

VCLT has the lower expense ratio, 0.03% a year against 0.7% for SRLN.

Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?

SRLN, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 7.37% against 5.92% for VCLT.

Which ETF has been more volatile?

VCLT has been more volatile over the past year, at 8.4% annualized against 3.5% for SRLN.

Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?

SRLN fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -7.9% against -34.2% for VCLT.

Compare SRLN and VCLT 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.