VOO vs XHB: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
VOO and XHB are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. VOO is Vanguard S&P 500 ETF, while XHB is State Street SPDR S&P Homebuilders ETF. VOO is broader by holdings count, with 508 positions versus 35 for XHB. VOO has the lower expense ratio. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has VOO ahead on AIQ Score, 63 versus 53.
What is the main difference between VOO and XHB?
VOO holds 508 positions to XHB's 35, and 1% of their weight is in the same securities.
| Metric | VOO | XHB |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.03% | 0.35% |
| Holdings | 508 | 35 |
| Top-10 concentration | 37.6% | 39.3% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 1.05% | 1.12% |
| Average volume | 6,986,663 | 2,137,161 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | +14% | -10% |
| YTD return | +13.2% | -4.8% |
| 5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested | +12.5% | +5.5% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 12.7% | 28.1% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -9.2% | -23.5% |
| Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested | -24.5% | -39.5% |
| Beta | 1.00 | 1.13 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.68 | -0.36 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.03 | -0.67 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 63/100 | 53/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 8/10 | 5/10 |
| Momentum | 59/100 | 49/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 87/100 | 53/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF vs State Street SPDR S&P Homebuilders ETF
VOO leads
VOO leads by 10 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 15 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 3 of 4 evidence groups support VOO, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
State Street SPDR S&P Homebuilders ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VOO over XHB, 63 versus 53 as of Oct 31, 2026. VOO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and quality, while XHB holds the stronger value profile. VOO also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor VOO today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the leader's advantage has been narrowing. VOO lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Vanguard S&P 500 ETF and State Street SPDR S&P Homebuilders ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
VOO vs XHB: 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 | VOO | XHB | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.03% | 0.35% | VOO |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 508 | 35 | VOO |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 37.6% | 39.3% | Similar |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 1.05% | 1.12% | Similar |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years | -24.5% | -39.5% | VOO |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 12.7% | 28.1% | VOO |
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 VOO and XHB 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 Resilience87 vs 53VOO +34
- Quality76 vs 54VOO +22
- Value41 vs 54XHB +13
- Momentum59 vs 49VOO +10
3 of 4 evidence groups favor VOO. VOO’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and quality; XHB keeps a meaningful value edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-30, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-29.
Largest factor move: Quality -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.
Largest factor move: Quality -1, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
VOO's lead was unchanged in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — VOO and XHB both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
VOO (Vanguard S&P 500 ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by risk resilience and quality.
XHB (State Street SPDR S&P Homebuilders ETF): the counter-case, on value, valuation — but at materially higher volatility, 25.5% against 10%.
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 | VOO | XHB | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.03% | 0.35% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 508 | 35 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 6,986,663 | 2,137,161 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 12.7% | 28.1% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -9.2% | -23.5% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.68 | -0.36 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 1.00 | 1.13 | 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
VOO and XHB share 1.33% of their weighted exposure across 14 common holdings.
491 holdings are unique to VOO, and 19 holdings are unique to XHB. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
XHB is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 39.31% of the fund, against 37.65% for VOO (35 holdings vs 508). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.
Largest shared positions
| Holding | VOO | XHB | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| HDHOME DEPOT INC | 0.51% | 3.62% | 0.51% |
| LOWLOWE S COS INC | 0.18% | 3.44% | 0.18% |
| TTTRANE TECHNOLOGIES PLC | 0.16% | 3.7% | 0.16% |
| JCIJOHNSON CONTROLS INTERNATION | 0.14% | 3.87% | 0.14% |
| CARRCARRIER GLOBAL CORP | 0.07% | 3.15% | 0.07% |
| DHIDR HORTON INC | 0.06% | 3.49% | 0.06% |
| WSMWILLIAMS SONOMA INC | 0.04% | 4.08% | 0.04% |
| PHMPULTEGROUP INC | 0.04% | 3.71% | 0.04% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What VOO adds that XHB doesn’t
| Holding | VOO | XHB |
|---|---|---|
| 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 |
What XHB adds that VOO doesn’t
| Holding | XHB | VOO |
|---|---|---|
| ALLEALLEGION PLC | 4.42% | 0.02% |
| OCOWENS CORNING | 4.18% | Not held |
| WSMWILLIAMS SONOMA INC | 4.08% | 0.04% |
| SKYCHAMPION HOMES INC | 3.94% | Not held |
| IBPINSTALLED BUILDING PRODUCTS | 3.9% | Not held |
| JCIJOHNSON CONTROLS INTERNATION | 3.87% | 0.14% |
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.
VOO vs XHB: five-year payout growth
XHB grew its split-adjusted payout faster over 2020-2025 — 13.70% a year against VOO's 5.91%. VOO never reduced its annual distribution in the window; XHB did in 1 year.
| Dividend metric | VOO | XHB |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y payout CAGR | 5.91% | 13.70% |
| 2020 annual payout | $5.303 | $0.422 |
| 2025 annual payout | $7.068 | $0.802 |
| Calendar-year declines | 0 | 1 |
| Peer rank | #88 of 138 | #42 of 138 |
Split-adjusted annual distributions, 2020–2025. Research as of Sep 19, 2026. Yield and expense ratio above are current values, not part of this window.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 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 | 63 vs 53 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | XHB | Value 41 vs 54 |
| Technicals | VOO | Price vs 50-day -1.6% vs 2.2%; vs 200-day 6% vs -6.9% |
| Risk Resilience | VOO | Risk Resilience 87 vs 53 |
| 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 VOO and XHB 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 moderate at 10 points.
- 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 · Jul 1 – Oct 30VOO lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 15 to 10 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- VOO +10
- 63 vs 53
- 7 sessions ago
- VOO +5
- 57 vs 52
- 30 sessions ago
- VOO +15
- 65 vs 50
- 90 sessions ago
- VOO +12
- 61 vs 49
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Jul 29 when VOO moved ahead of XHB.
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.
3 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only VOO
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (5.42%)
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (0.90%)
- EMA Ribbon Compression — neutral, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.1%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only XHB
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (6.50%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -1.77%, AIQ 0 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price -0.3%, AIQ 0 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.
- 1XHB closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 34 points behind, the largest single contributor to VOO's edge.
- 2XHB's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3VOO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 5 points over 30 sessions, and a further 10-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 4 of 6 windows| Metric | VOO | XHB |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.1% | 2.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 1.3% | 2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 4.1% | -6.3% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 8.5% | -5.8% |
| Year to date | 13.2% | -4.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 14% | -10% |
Technicals
VOO has the stronger structure| Metric | VOO | XHB |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 48.7 | 56.2 |
| ADX (14) | 13.9 | 19 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.6% | 2.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 6% | -6.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 10% | 25.5% |
Risk
VOO is the more resilient| Metric | VOO | XHB |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1 | 1.13 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.68 | -0.36 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.03 | -0.67 |
| Max drawdown | -9.2% | -23.5% |
| Current drawdown | -0.9% | -19.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 12.7% | 28.1% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.4% | -2.6% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between VOO and XHB?
VOO holds 508 positions to XHB's 35, and 1% of their weight is in the same securities.
How much do VOO and XHB overlap?
VOO and XHB share 1.33% of their weighted exposure across 14 common holdings. 491 holdings are unique to VOO, and 19 holdings are unique to XHB. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Which ETF is more diversified, VOO or XHB?
VOO holds more positions: 508 versus 35 for XHB.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
VOO has the lower expense ratio, 0.03% a year against 0.35% for XHB.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
Their trailing 12-month distribution yields are similar: 1.05% for VOO and 1.12% for XHB.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
XHB has been more volatile over the past year, at 28.1% annualized against 12.7% for VOO.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
VOO fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -24.5% against -39.5% for XHB.
Compare VOO and XHB 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.