VCLT vs VTI: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk

VCLT and VTI are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. VCLT is Vanguard Long-Term Corporate Bond ETF, while VTI is Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF. VTI is broader by holdings count, with 3,524 positions versus 2,745 for VCLT. VTI is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has VTI ahead on AIQ Score, 60 versus 56.

Market data as of Oct 22, 2026 market close· Fund characteristics as of Oct 22, 2026
VCLT
Vanguard
vs
VTI
Vanguard
VCLT
Vanguard Long-Term Corporate Bond ETF
Issuer
Vanguard
Inception
2009-11-19
VTI
Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF
Issuer
Vanguard
Inception
2001-05-24

What is the main difference between VCLT and VTI?

VCLT and VTI have little in common: 0% of their weight is in the same securities.

Expense ratio
VCLT
0.03%
VTI
0.03%
Lower annual fund cost
Holdings
VCLT
2,745
VTI
3,524
Broader reported basketVTI
1Y return
VCLT
-11.2%
VTI
+15.8%
Trailing performanceVTI
Annualized volatility
VCLT
8.4%
VTI
13%
Lower realized volatilityVCLT
MetricVCLTVTI
Fund
Expense ratio0.03%0.03%
Holdings2,7453,524
Top-10 concentration2.6%33.2%
Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months5.92%1.05%
Average volume5,020,1053,096,956
Performance
1Y return-11.2%+15.8%
YTD return-8%+12.5%
5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested-3.3%+11.4%
Risk
Annualized volatility8.4%13%
Max drawdown (1Y)-14%-9.2%
Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested-34.2%-25.4%
Beta0.301.02
Sharpe ratio-1.820.86
Sortino ratio-2.551.32
AlgovestIQ
AIQ Score56/10060/100
AIQ Edge Score6/108/10
Momentum57/10051/100
Risk Resilience55/10086/100

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

Vanguard Long-Term Corporate Bond ETF vs Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF

Data as of Oct 22, 2026· market close· Coverage 64/66 fields· High confidence
AIQ VerdictFragileAIQ Comparison Conviction 4/10

VTI leads

VTI leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 13 points over 30 sessions.

Fragile: 3 of 4 evidence groups support VTI, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.

Evidence agreement: 3 of 4Comparison trend: Weakening
VCLT

Vanguard Long-Term Corporate Bond ETF

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

Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF

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

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VTI over VCLT, 60 versus 56 as of Oct 22, 2026. VTI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and quality, while VCLT holds the stronger momentum profile. VTI also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor VTI today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. VTI lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 13 to 4 points over 30 sessions.

Compare Vanguard Long-Term Corporate Bond ETF and Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.

VCLT vs VTI: 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 wantVCLTVTIFits
Lower costExpense ratio0.03%0.03%Similar
Broader diversificationNumber of holdings2,7453,524VTI
Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings2.6%33.2%VCLT
Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield5.92%1.05%VCLT
Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years-34.2%-25.4%VTI
Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year8.4%13%VCLT

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.

VCLT
-15.5%
VTI
+71.5%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested

VCLT $8,450 · VTI $17,146

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

Compare VCLT and VTI 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.

VCLT advantage
0
VTI advantage
  • Risk Resilience55 vs 86
    VTI +31
  • Quality65 vs 74
    VTI +9
  • Momentum57 vs 51
    VCLT +6
  • Value45 vs 42
    Even

3 of 4 evidence groups favor VTI. VTI’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and quality; VCLT keeps a meaningful momentum edge.

What changed since the last close

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

VCLT+2 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum +8

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

VTI+1 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum +4

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 active signals are unchanged.

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

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

The central trade-off

VTI (Vanguard Morningstar Total Stock Market ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and quality.

VCLT (Vanguard Long-Term Corporate Bond ETF): the counter-case, on momentum.

Fund facts, side by side

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

MeasureVCLTVTIWhy it matters
Expense ratio0.03%0.03%Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold.
Holdings2,7453,524More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns.
Average volume5,020,1053,096,956Liquidity — matters most if you trade size.
Annualized volatility8.4%13%Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure.
Max drawdown (1Y)-14%-9.2%The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year.
Sharpe ratio-1.820.86Return per unit of risk. Higher is better.
Beta0.301.02Sensitivity 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 0.2%
Technology0.0% vs 38.2%
Financial Services0.0% vs 11.6%
Healthcare0.0% vs 9.9%
Communication Services0.0% vs 9.1%
Industrials0.0% vs 8.5%
Consumer Cyclical0.0% vs 8.5%
Consumer Defensive0.0% vs 4.2%
VCLTVTI

How much of the same holdings they own

VCLT and VTI share 0% of their weighted exposure across 0 common holdings.

2,740 holdings are unique to VCLT, and 3,499 holdings are unique to VTI. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

VTI is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 33.24% of the fund, against 2.61% for VCLT (3,524 holdings vs 2,745). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.

What VCLT adds that VTI doesn’t

HoldingVCLTVTI
Anheuser-Busch Cos LLC / Anheuser-Busch InBev Worldwide Inc 4.900.37%Not held
CVS Health Corp 5.05% 03/25/20480.33%Not held
Meta Platforms Inc 5.63% 11/15/20550.28%Not held
Boeing Co/The 5.80% 05/01/20500.26%Not held
CVS Health Corp 4.78% 03/25/20380.24%Not held
AT&T Inc 3.55% 09/15/20550.24%Not held

What VTI adds that VCLT doesn’t

HoldingVTIVCLT
NVDANVIDIA Corp6.4%Not held
AAPLApple Inc6.29%Not held
MSFTMicrosoft Corp4.79%Not held
AMZNAmazon.com Inc3.65%Not held
GOOGLAlphabet Inc2.9%Not held
AVGOBroadcom Inc2.56%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.

AIQ Agreement Matrix

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

Evidence groupFavorsReading
AIQ ScoreVTI56 vs 60
FundamentalsNot coveredNot covered
ValuationEvenValue 45 vs 42
TechnicalsVTIPrice vs 50-day -1.1% vs 0.2%; vs 200-day -5.6% vs 5.3%
Risk ResilienceVTIRisk Resilience 55 vs 86
Analyst expectationsNot coveredNot covered

✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of VCLT and VTI 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 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
  • The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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 VTI.

How the comparison changed

120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20

VTI lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 13 to 4 points over 30 sessions.

Jun 21VCLT leads above the line · VTI leads belowOct 20
Today
VTI +4
56 vs 60
7 sessions ago
VTI +6
53 vs 59
30 sessions ago
VTI +13
47 vs 60
90 sessions ago
VTI +18
48 vs 66

The lead has not changed hands in this window.

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.

VCLTConflicted

1 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted

Only VCLT

  • Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
  • Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (4.68%)
  • 52-Week Low Proximity — bearish, risk, long horizon (2.9%)
  • Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
  • MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
VTIConflicted

2 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted

Only VTI

  • Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (5.66%)
  • EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
  • 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.7%)
  • MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon

Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: ATR Contraction - Coiling.

VTI 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.

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).

VTIConfirmed strength

Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.55%, 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. 1VCLT closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 31 points behind, the largest single contributor to VTI's edge.
  2. 2VCLT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
  3. 3VTI's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 2 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
  4. 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 9 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate VTI's advantage entirely.

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

VTI leads 5 of 6 windows
MetricVCLTVTI
1 week (5 sessions)1.3%-1.1%
1 month (20 sessions)-2.7%-1.1%
3 months (63 sessions)-4%2.2%
6 months (126 sessions)-7.4%8.4%
Year to date-8%12.5%
1 year (252 sessions)-11.2%15.8%

Technicals

VTI has the stronger structure
MetricVCLTVTI
RSI (14)67.855.2
ADX (14)27.713.4
Price vs 50-day-1.1%0.2%
Price vs 200-day-5.6%5.3%
Volatility (1M, annualized)10.5%9.8%

Risk

VTI is the more resilient
MetricVCLTVTI
Beta0.31.02
Sharpe ratio-1.820.86
Sortino ratio-2.551.32
Max drawdown-14%-9.2%
Current drawdown-11.9%-1.9%
Annualized volatility8.4%13%
Value at risk (95%)-0.9%-1.4%

Straight answers

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

What is the difference between VCLT and VTI?

VCLT and VTI have little in common: 0% of their weight is in the same securities.

How much do VCLT and VTI overlap?

VCLT and VTI share 0% of their weighted exposure across 0 common holdings. 2,740 holdings are unique to VCLT, and 3,499 holdings are unique to VTI. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

Which ETF is more diversified, VCLT or VTI?

VTI holds more positions: 3,524 versus 2,745 for VCLT.

Which has the lower expense ratio?

Neither: both charge 0.03% a year.

Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?

VCLT, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 5.92% against 1.05% for VTI.

Which ETF has been more volatile?

VTI has been more volatile over the past year, at 13% annualized against 8.4% for VCLT.

Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?

VTI fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -25.4% against -34.2% for VCLT.

Compare VCLT and VTI 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.