VGLT vs VOO: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
VGLT and VOO are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. VGLT is Vanguard Long-Term Treasury ETF, while VOO is Vanguard S&P 500 ETF. VOO is broader by holdings count, with 508 positions versus 102 for VGLT. VOO is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has VOO ahead on AIQ Score, 64 versus 53.
What is the main difference between VGLT and VOO?
VOO holds 508 positions to VGLT's 102, and 0% of their weight is in the same securities.
| Metric | VGLT | VOO |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.03% | 0.03% |
| Holdings | 102 | 508 |
| Top-10 concentration | 21.3% | 37.6% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 4.91% | 1.05% |
| Average volume | 2,740,252 | 7,814,237 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | -11.3% | +16.4% |
| YTD return | -7.8% | +12.7% |
| 5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested | -6.7% | +12.6% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 8.8% | 12.8% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -14.9% | -9.2% |
| Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested | -41% | -24.5% |
| Beta | 0.22 | 1.00 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.74 | 0.91 |
| Sortino ratio | -2.63 | 1.38 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 53/100 | 64/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 5/10 | 9/10 |
| Momentum | 59/100 | 64/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 53/100 | 87/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Vanguard Long-Term Treasury ETF vs Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO leads
VOO leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 20 points over 30 sessions.
Competitive: 4 of 4 evidence groups support VOO, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Vanguard Long-Term Treasury ETF
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VOO over VGLT, 64 versus 53 as of Oct 21, 2026. VOO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and quality. VOO also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 4 of 4 covered evidence groups favor VOO today, and the comparison is rated Competitive on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. VOO lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 20 to 11 points over 30 sessions. VOO leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so a sweep is not explained by valuation alone — it deserves additional scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, expectations or event risk.
Compare Vanguard Long-Term Treasury ETF and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
VGLT vs VOO: 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 | VGLT | VOO | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.03% | 0.03% | Similar |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 102 | 508 | VOO |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 21.3% | 37.6% | VGLT |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 4.91% | 1.05% | VGLT |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years | -41% | -24.5% | VOO |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 8.8% | 12.8% | VGLT |
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 VGLT and VOO 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.
- Risk Resilience53 vs 87VOO +34
- Quality64 vs 77VOO +13
- Value36 vs 41VOO +5
- Momentum59 vs 64VOO +5
4 of 4 evidence groups favor VOO. VOO’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and quality.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +7
New signals
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +17
New signals
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
VOO's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — VGLT and VOO 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 | VGLT | VOO | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.03% | 0.03% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 102 | 508 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 2,740,252 | 7,814,237 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 8.8% | 12.8% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -14.9% | -9.2% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.74 | 0.91 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 0.22 | 1.00 | 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
VGLT and VOO share 0% of their weighted exposure across 0 common holdings.
99 holdings are unique to VGLT, and 505 holdings are unique to VOO. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
VOO is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 37.65% of the fund, against 21.31% for VGLT (508 holdings vs 102). 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 VGLT adds that VOO doesn’t
| Holding | VGLT | VOO |
|---|---|---|
| United States Treasury Note/Bond 5.00% 05/15/2056 | 2.22% | Not held |
| United States Treasury Note/Bond 4.75% 05/15/2055 | 2.2% | Not held |
| United States Treasury Note/Bond 4.75% 08/15/2055 | 2.2% | Not held |
| United States Treasury Note/Bond 4.63% 02/15/2055 | 2.15% | Not held |
| United States Treasury Note/Bond 4.63% 11/15/2055 | 2.14% | Not held |
| United States Treasury Note/Bond 4.75% 02/15/2056 | 2.13% | Not held |
What VOO adds that VGLT doesn’t
| Holding | VOO | VGLT |
|---|---|---|
| NVDANVIDIA Corp | 7.55% | Not held |
| AAPLApple Inc | 7.05% | Not held |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.36% | Not held |
| AMZNAmazon.com Inc | 4.13% | Not held |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc | 3.24% | Not held |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.86% | 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
4 of 4 covered evidence groups favor VOO. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | VOO | 53 vs 64 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | VOO | Value 36 vs 41 |
| Technicals | VOO | Price vs 50-day -0.6% vs 0.6%; vs 200-day -5.3% vs 5.9% |
| Risk Resilience | VOO | Risk Resilience 53 vs 87 |
| 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 VGLT and VOO and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The two are close enough that your objective, not the score, should decide.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 11 points.
- 4 of 4 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 VOO.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20VOO lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 20 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- VOO +11
- 53 vs 64
- 7 sessions ago
- VOO +13
- 50 vs 63
- 30 sessions ago
- VOO +20
- 44 vs 64
- 90 sessions ago
- VOO +24
- 44 vs 68
The lead changed hands once in this window, most recently on Jun 29 when VOO moved ahead of VGLT.
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.
1 bullish / 3 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only VGLT
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (4.84%)
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only VOO
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (5.84%)
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.2%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: ATR Contraction - Coiling.
VOO 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 +0.12%, AIQ +2 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.55%, AIQ +4 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.
- 1VGLT closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to VOO's edge.
- 2VGLT's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3VOO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 9 points over 30 sessions, and a further 11-point move would eliminate VOO'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
VOO leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | VGLT | VOO |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 2% | -1.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1.9% | -0.8% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -3.7% | 2.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -7% | 9.2% |
| Year to date | -7.8% | 12.7% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | -11.3% | 16.4% |
Technicals
VOO has the stronger structure| Metric | VGLT | VOO |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 71.4 | 56.2 |
| ADX (14) | 28 | 12.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -0.6% | 0.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | -5.3% | 5.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 10.8% | 9.4% |
Risk
VOO is the more resilient| Metric | VGLT | VOO |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.22 | 1 |
| Sharpe ratio | -1.74 | 0.91 |
| Sortino ratio | -2.63 | 1.38 |
| Max drawdown | -14.9% | -9.2% |
| Current drawdown | -11.9% | -1.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 8.8% | 12.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1% | -1.4% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between VGLT and VOO?
VOO holds 508 positions to VGLT's 102, and 0% of their weight is in the same securities.
How much do VGLT and VOO overlap?
VGLT and VOO share 0% of their weighted exposure across 0 common holdings. 99 holdings are unique to VGLT, and 505 holdings are unique to VOO. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Which ETF is more diversified, VGLT or VOO?
VOO holds more positions: 508 versus 102 for VGLT.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
Neither: both charge 0.03% a year.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
VGLT, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 4.91% against 1.05% for VOO.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
VOO has been more volatile over the past year, at 12.8% annualized against 8.8% for VGLT.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
VOO fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -24.5% against -41% for VGLT.
Compare VGLT and VOO 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.