USO vs VXUS: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk

USO and VXUS are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. USO is United States Oil Fund, LP, while VXUS is Vanguard Total International Stock ETF. VXUS is broader by holdings count, with 8,821 positions versus 25 for USO. VXUS has the lower expense ratio. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has USO ahead on AIQ Score, 65 versus 63.

Market data as of Oct 21, 2026 market close· Fund characteristics as of Oct 21, 2026
USO
USCF
vs
VXUS
Vanguard
USO
United States Oil Fund, LP
Issuer
USCF
Inception
2006-04-10
VXUS
Vanguard Total International Stock ETF
Issuer
Vanguard
Inception
2011-01-26

What is the main difference between USO and VXUS?

VXUS holds 8,821 positions to USO's 25.

Expense ratio
USO
0.86%
VXUS
0.05%
Lower annual fund costVXUS
Holdings
USO
25
VXUS
8,821
Broader reported basketVXUS
1Y return
USO
+135.5%
VXUS
+12.8%
Trailing performanceUSO
Annualized volatility
USO
49.6%
VXUS
17.2%
Lower realized volatilityVXUS
MetricUSOVXUS
Fund
Expense ratio0.86%0.05%
Holdings258,821
Average volume5,838,1905,459,776
Performance
1Y return+135.5%+12.8%
YTD return+132%+11%
5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested+22.7%+8.3%
Risk
Annualized volatility49.6%17.2%
Max drawdown (1Y)-32.5%-11.4%
Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested-36.2%-28.9%
Beta-1.551.11
Sharpe ratio1.910.56
Sortino ratio3.040.83
AlgovestIQ
AIQ Score65/10063/100
AIQ Edge Score9/109/10
Momentum82/10041/100
Risk Resilience23/10082/100

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

United States Oil Fund, LP vs Vanguard Total International Stock ETF

Data as of Oct 21, 2026· market close· Coverage 63/66 fields· High confidence
AIQ VerdictFragileAIQ Comparison Conviction 2/10

USO leads

USO leads by 2 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from VXUS.

Fragile: 1 of 3 evidence groups support USO, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.

Evidence agreement: 1 of 3Comparison trend: Reversed
USO

United States Oil Fund, LP

Leads
AIQ Score
65/100
AIQ Edge Score
9/10
VXUS

Vanguard Total International Stock ETF

AIQ Score
63/100
AIQ Edge Score
9/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors USO over VXUS, 65 versus 63 as of Oct 21, 2026. USO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum, while VXUS holds the stronger risk resilience profile. USO also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 1 of 3 covered evidence groups favor USO today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. USO lead: Reversed — VXUS led by 11 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; USO now leads by 2.

Compare United States Oil Fund, LP and Vanguard Total International Stock ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.

USO 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 wantUSOVXUSFits
Lower costExpense ratio0.86%0.05%VXUS
Broader diversificationNumber of holdings258,821VXUS
Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years-36.2%-28.9%VXUS
Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year49.6%17.2%VXUS

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.

USO
+177.7%
VXUS
+48.9%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested

USO $27,773 · VXUS $14,887

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

Compare USO and VXUS 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.

USO advantage
0
VXUS advantage
  • Risk Resilience23 vs 82
    VXUS +59
  • Momentum82 vs 41
    USO +41
  • Quality72 vs 76
    VXUS +4

1 of 3 evidence groups favor USO. USO’s edge is concentrated in momentum; VXUS 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.

USO0 AIQ

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 6 active signals are unchanged.

VXUS+1 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum +6

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

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

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

The central trade-off

USO (United States Oil Fund, LP): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum.

VXUS (Vanguard Total International Stock ETF): the counter-case, on risk resilience, quality.

AIQ vs Wall Street

Where the systematic read and the analyst consensus line up — and where they do not.

MeasureUSOVXUSNote
Implied upside to target+57.8%—Level
Target dispersion0%—Lower is tighter analyst agreement
Consensus——Context, not a primary driver
Analysts covering1—Higher coverage generally improves confidence

Analyst targets are expectations, not predictions. Dispersion matters as much as the midpoint.

Fund facts, side by side

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

MeasureUSOVXUSWhy it matters
Expense ratio0.86%0.05%Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold.
Holdings258,821More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns.
Average volume5,838,1905,459,776Liquidity — matters most if you trade size.
Annualized volatility49.6%17.2%Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure.
Max drawdown (1Y)-32.5%-11.4%The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year.
Sharpe ratio1.910.56Return per unit of risk. Higher is better.
Beta-1.551.11Sensitivity 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.

Cash & Others100.0% vs 3.8%
Financial Services0.0% vs 22.2%
Technology0.0% vs 20.9%
Industrials0.0% vs 14.3%
Basic Materials0.0% vs 7.3%
Consumer Cyclical0.0% vs 7.1%
Healthcare0.0% vs 6.6%
Consumer Defensive0.0% vs 4.6%
USOVXUS

AIQ Agreement Matrix

1 of 3 covered evidence groups favor USO. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.

Evidence groupFavorsReading
AIQ ScoreEven65 vs 63
FundamentalsNot coveredNot covered
ValuationNot coveredNot covered
TechnicalsUSOPrice vs 50-day 10.8% vs -2.6%; vs 200-day 33.6% vs 0.6%
Risk ResilienceVXUSRisk Resilience 23 vs 82
Analyst expectationsNot coveredNot covered

✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of USO and VXUS 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 narrow at 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
  • Only 1 of 3 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 USO.

How the comparison changed

120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20

USO lead: Reversed — VXUS led by 11 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; USO now leads by 2.

Jun 21USO leads above the line · VXUS leads belowOct 20
Today
USO +2
65 vs 63
7 sessions ago
Level
61 vs 61
30 sessions ago
VXUS +11
51 vs 62
90 sessions ago
VXUS +13
58 vs 71

The lead changed hands 5 times in this window, most recently on Sep 21 when VXUS moved ahead of USO.

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.

USOConflicted

5 bullish / 1 bearish, conflicted

Only USO

  • RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
  • EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
  • 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (0.4%)
  • Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
  • MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
VXUSConflicted

1 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted

Only VXUS

  • Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
  • ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (1.08%)
  • MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon

Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active.

USO 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.

USONo material change

Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.5%, AIQ 0 points).

VXUSConfirmed strength

Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.31%, 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.

  1. 1VXUS closes the Momentum gap — currently 41 points behind, the largest single contributor to USO's edge.
  2. 2VXUS's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
  3. 3USO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 5 bullish and 1 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

USO leads 6 of 6 windows
MetricUSOVXUS
1 week (5 sessions)4.9%-0.9%
1 month (20 sessions)11.5%-4.3%
3 months (63 sessions)22%-0.9%
6 months (126 sessions)25.2%2.3%
Year to date132%11%
1 year (252 sessions)135.5%12.8%

Technicals

USO has the stronger structure
MetricUSOVXUS
RSI (14)73.941.4
ADX (14)25.619.9
Price vs 50-day10.8%-2.6%
Price vs 200-day33.6%0.6%
Volatility (1M, annualized)34.7%12.1%

Risk

VXUS is the more resilient
MetricUSOVXUS
Beta-1.551.11
Sharpe ratio1.910.56
Sortino ratio3.040.83
Max drawdown-32.5%-11.4%
Current drawdown-0.8%-5.3%
Annualized volatility49.6%17.2%
Value at risk (95%)-4.4%-1.7%

Straight answers

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

What is the difference between USO and VXUS?

VXUS holds 8,821 positions to USO's 25.

Which ETF is more diversified, USO or VXUS?

VXUS holds more positions: 8,821 versus 25 for USO.

Which has the lower expense ratio?

VXUS has the lower expense ratio, 0.05% a year against 0.86% for USO.

Which ETF has been more volatile?

USO has been more volatile over the past year, at 49.6% annualized against 17.2% for VXUS.

Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?

VXUS fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -28.9% against -36.2% for USO.

Compare USO 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.