VEA vs VGK ETF Comparison
Compare VEA and VGK across fund costs, diversification, holdings, performance, income, risk and current AlgovestIQ evidence.
What is the main difference between VEA and VGK?
VEA is Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF, while VGK is Vanguard FTSE Europe ETF. VEA is tied to International Equity; VGK is tied to International Equity. VEA is broader by holdings count, with 3,831 positions versus 1,212 for VGK. VGK is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight.
| Metric | VEA | VGK | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.03% | 0.06% | Fund |
| Assets under management | $315.0B | $38.5B | Fund |
| Holdings | 3,831 | 1,212 | Fund |
| Top-10 concentration | 14.5% | 18.8% | Fund |
| Average volume | 14,071,293 | 5,554,429 | Fund |
| Underlying exposure | International Equity | International Equity | Fund |
| Annualized volatility | 17.4% | 15.8% | Risk |
| Max drawdown | -11.8% | -12.5% | Risk |
| Beta | 1.08 | 0.91 | Risk |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.19 | 0.88 | Risk |
| Sortino ratio | 1.72 | 1.40 | Risk |
| AIQ Score | 67/100 | 69/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| AIQ Edge Score | 10/10 | 10/10 | AlgovestIQ |
| Momentum | 60/100 | 57/100 | AlgovestIQ |
| Risk Resilience | 84/100 | 84/100 | AlgovestIQ |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF vs Vanguard FTSE Europe ETF
VGK leads
VGK leads by 2 AIQ points, but the lead has narrowed from 5 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 0 of 3 evidence groups support VGK, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF
Vanguard FTSE Europe ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VGK over VEA, 69 versus 67 as of Sep 5, 2026. VGK also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 0 of 3 covered evidence groups favor VGK today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. VGK lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 2 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF and Vanguard FTSE Europe ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
Compare VEA and VGK 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.
- Quality30%77 vs 72VEA +5
- Momentum25%60 vs 57Even
- Risk Resilience15%84 vs 84Even
0 of 3 evidence groups favor VGK. Neither name separates cleanly on the covered dimensions.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-09-03, compared against the prior scored session 2026-09-02.
Largest factor move: Momentum +6
No new signals fired.
Largest factor move: Momentum +6
No new signals fired.
VGK's lead was unchanged in the latest snapshot.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — VEA and VGK both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
VGK (Vanguard FTSE Europe ETF): the stronger current systematic profile.
VEA (Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets ETF): the counter-case, on quality, technicals.
Which one fits your objective
The same two names rank differently depending on what you are optimizing for. All six reads are shown at once — none of them is hidden behind a toggle.
Balanced
VGKVGK on the overall AIQ Score, which weights Quality and Value at 30% each.
Growth
EvenGrowth figures are not covered for both names.
Value
EvenThe two are level on Value.
Momentum
EvenThe two are level on Momentum.
Lower downside
VGKVGK carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility.
Analyst upside
EvenAnalyst targets are level or not covered for both names.
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 | VEA | VGK | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.03% | 0.06% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Assets under management | $315.0B | $38.5B | Larger funds generally carry tighter spreads. |
| Holdings | 3,873 | 1,247 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 14,071,293 | 5,554,429 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 17.4% | 15.8% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown | -11.8% | -12.5% | The worst peak-to-trough loss on record for the fund. |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.19 | 0.88 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 1.08 | 0.91 | Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio. |
Where the exposure actually sits
VEA and VGK share 51.06% of their weighted exposure across 1207 common holdings.
VGK is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 18.8% of the fund, against 14.46% for VEA (1212 holdings vs 3831). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.
2624 holdings are unique to VEA and 5 to VGK. Owning both is a partial overlap: a majority of the capital is distinct, but the largest positions are shared.
Largest shared positions
| Holding | VEA | VGK | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| ASML.ASASML Holding NV | 1.96% | 3.93% | 1.96% |
| HSBA.LHSBC Holdings PLC | 1.13% | 2.26% | 1.13% |
| ROP.SWRoche Holding AG | 0.95% | 1.9% | 0.95% |
| NOVN.SWNovartis AG | 0.9% | 1.8% | 0.9% |
| SHEL.LShell PLC | 0.79% | 1.45% | 0.79% |
| AZN.LAstraZeneca PLC | 0.79% | 1.58% | 0.79% |
| NESN.SWNestle SA | 0.79% | 1.59% | 0.79% |
| BATS.LBritish American Tobacco PLC | 0.76% | 1.52% | 0.76% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
ETF comparison questions
Short answers to the fund-specific questions behind this comparison.
Which ETF is more diversified, VEA or VGK?
VEA currently has more reported holdings, with 3,831 positions versus 1,212.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
VEA has the lower reported expense ratio in the current fund profile.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
The current dataset does not show a higher-yield winner.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
VEA has the higher annualized volatility in the current risk snapshot.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
VEA has the less severe max drawdown in the current risk snapshot.
Which ETF has the stronger current AlgovestIQ evidence?
VGK currently leads on supporting AlgovestIQ evidence, 69 to 67.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
0 of 3 covered evidence groups favor VGK. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 67 vs 69 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | Not covered | Not covered |
| Technicals | VEA | Price vs 50-day 3% vs 1.6%; vs 200-day 8.4% vs 5.6% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 84 vs 84 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of VEA and VGK and are excluded from the count.
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 2 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 0 of 3 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 VGK.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Apr 22 – Sep 3VGK lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 2 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- VGK +2
- 67 vs 69
- 7 sessions ago
- VGK +2
- 68 vs 70
- 30 sessions ago
- VGK +5
- 71 vs 76
- 90 sessions ago
- VGK +3
- 67 vs 70
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Jul 2 when VGK moved ahead of VEA.
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.
4 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (5.66%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
4 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (3.96%)
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
VGK 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.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.44%, AIQ +2 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price 0%, 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.
- 1VEA's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 2VGK's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 3The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 2-point move would eliminate VGK'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.
Technicals
VEA has the stronger structure| Metric | VEA | VGK |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 48.9 | 45.2 |
| ADX (14) | 12.7 | 17.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | 3% | 1.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 8.4% | 5.6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 12.1% | 8.5% |
Risk
Split| Metric | VEA | VGK |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.08 | 0.91 |
| Sharpe ratio | 1.19 | 0.88 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.72 | 1.4 |
| Max drawdown | -11.8% | -12.5% |
| Current drawdown | -0.5% | -1.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 17.4% | 15.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.7% | -1.4% |
Straight answers
Each answer is regenerated from the current snapshot, not written once and left to age.
Which is better, VEA or VGK?
On the Algovestiq AIQ Score, VGK is the stronger of the two as of Sep 5, 2026, scoring 69 against VEA's 67. The edge comes from its factor profile. VEA is not without a case — it holds the better quality profile, which matters more if that is the objective you are optimizing for. This is a systematic score, not a recommendation: it ranks the two on the same evidence, it does not know your holding period or tax position.
Is VEA or VGK the better buy right now?
VGK carries the stronger systematic profile as of Sep 5, 2026, and the comparison is rated Fragile — 0 of 3 covered evidence groups agree. A Fragile rating means the conclusion is sensitive: the AIQ gap is narrow at 2 points. Treat the lead as provisional.
Why does the AIQ Score favor VGK over VEA?
The composite weights Quality at 30%, Value at 30%, Momentum at 25% and Risk Resilience at 15%. VEA leads Quality by 5 points. Where the two split, the factor with the larger weight carries the result.
Which is better value, VEA or VGK?
Neither name separates on the peer-relative Value factor. The two are level on Value. The Value factor reads valuation relative to sector peers and to the company's own fundamental quality, so it is not the same as simply having the lower multiple.
Which has stronger growth, VEA or VGK?
Growth figures are not covered for both names. Growth here is measured on reported revenue and earnings, not on forward estimates — it describes what the businesses have delivered, not what the Street expects next.
Which has stronger momentum, VEA or VGK?
The two are level on Momentum. Momentum carries 25% of the AIQ composite. It has documented persistence over three- to twelve-month horizons, which makes it a timing input rather than a reason to hold something indefinitely.
Which is riskier, VEA or VGK?
VGK is the more resilient of the two, so the other name carries the higher downside risk. VGK carries the lower 1-month annualized volatility. The Risk Resilience factor weights 15% of the composite; position sizing usually responds to it more usefully than the buy/avoid decision does.
Is VEA more profitable than VGK?
Margin data is not comparable for both names in the current snapshot.
Is VGK's lead over VEA getting stronger or weaker?
VGK lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 5 to 2 points over 30 sessions. This is measured from 120 daily comparison snapshots between 2026-04-22 and 2026-09-03. The lead has changed hands 6 times in that window, most recently on 2026-07-02, when VGK moved ahead of VEA.
What would change the VEA vs VGK verdict?
The result is a state, not a forecast, so it changes when the underlying evidence changes. Concretely: VEA's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend; VGK's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once; the narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 2-point move would eliminate VGK's advantage entirely.
What do the current signals say about VEA and VGK?
VEA: 4 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. VGK: 4 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted. A conflicted state means bullish and bearish rules are active on the same name at once — the technical evidence is not pointing one way, and a decision taken on it carries more timing risk. The most decision-relevant rule on VEA is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon). On VGK it is Golden Cross Active (bullish, long horizon).
Compare VEA and VGK with others
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality (30%), Value (30%), Momentum (25%) and Risk (15%). 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.