VXUS vs XME: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
VXUS and XME are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. VXUS is Vanguard Total International Stock ETF, while XME is State Street SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF. VXUS is broader by holdings count, with 8,821 positions versus 41 for XME. XME is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has VXUS ahead on AIQ Score, 64 versus 51.
What is the main difference between VXUS and XME?
XME puts 80% of its assets in Basic Materials, while VXUS spreads across 11 sectors with none above 22%.
| Metric | VXUS | XME |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.05% | 0.35% |
| Holdings | 8,821 | 41 |
| Top-10 concentration | 12.9% | 46.8% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 2.37% | 0.34% |
| Average volume | 5,266,735 | 1,832,856 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | +11.7% | +1.5% |
| YTD return | +11% | -2.2% |
| 5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested | +8.3% | +19.1% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 17.2% | 37.4% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -11.4% | -27.7% |
| Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested | -28.9% | -37.3% |
| Beta | 1.12 | 1.85 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.46 | 0.16 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.68 | 0.26 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 64/100 | 51/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 9/10 | 4/10 |
| Momentum | 46/100 | 36/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 83/100 | 46/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Vanguard Total International Stock ETF vs State Street SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF
VXUS leads
VXUS leads by 13 AIQ points, primarily on Risk Resilience and Momentum.
Stable: 3 of 3 evidence groups support VXUS, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
Vanguard Total International Stock ETF
State Street SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VXUS over XME, 64 versus 51 as of Oct 31, 2026. VXUS's advantage is driven primarily by stronger risk resilience and momentum. VXUS also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 3 covered evidence groups favor VXUS today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. VXUS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 13 points over 30 sessions.
Compare Vanguard Total International Stock ETF and State Street SPDR S&P Metals & Mining ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
VXUS vs XME: 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 | VXUS | XME | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.05% | 0.35% | VXUS |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 8,821 | 41 | VXUS |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 12.9% | 46.8% | VXUS |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 2.37% | 0.34% | VXUS |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years | -28.9% | -37.3% | VXUS |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 17.2% | 37.4% | 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.
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 VXUS and XME 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 Resilience83 vs 46VXUS +37
- Momentum46 vs 36VXUS +10
- Quality76 vs 67VXUS +9
3 of 3 evidence groups favor VXUS. VXUS’s edge is concentrated in risk resilience and momentum.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-28, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-27.
Largest factor move: Momentum +14
New signals
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +3
New signals
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
VXUS's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — VXUS and XME 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 | VXUS | XME | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.05% | 0.35% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 8,821 | 41 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 5,266,735 | 1,832,856 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 17.2% | 37.4% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -11.4% | -27.7% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.46 | 0.16 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 1.12 | 1.85 | 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
VXUS and XME share 0% of their weighted exposure across 0 common holdings.
8,281 holdings are unique to VXUS, and 39 holdings are unique to XME. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
XME is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 46.84% of the fund, against 12.94% for VXUS (41 holdings vs 8,821). 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 VXUS adds that XME doesn’t
| Holding | VXUS | XME |
|---|---|---|
| 2330.TWTaiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd | 4.02% | Not held |
| 005930.KSSamsung Electronics Co Ltd | 1.8% | Not held |
| ASML.ASASML Holding NV | 1.42% | Not held |
| 000660.KSSK hynix Inc | 1.41% | Not held |
| 0700.HKTencent Holdings Ltd | 0.85% | Not held |
| HSBA.LHSBC Holdings PLC | 0.82% | Not held |
What XME adds that VXUS doesn’t
| Holding | XME | VXUS |
|---|---|---|
| HLHECLA MINING CO | 5.58% | Not held |
| NEMNEWMONT CORP | 5.33% | Not held |
| CDECOEUR MINING INC | 5.17% | Not held |
| RGLDROYAL GOLD INC | 5.05% | Not held |
| UECURANIUM ENERGY CORP | 4.58% | Not held |
| FCXFREEPORT MCMORAN INC | 4.49% | 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 3 covered evidence groups favor VXUS. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | VXUS | 64 vs 51 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | Not covered | Not covered |
| Technicals | VXUS | Price vs 50-day -3.9% vs -10.5%; vs 200-day 0.5% vs -10.7% |
| Risk Resilience | VXUS | Risk Resilience 83 vs 46 |
| 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 VXUS and XME and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is wide at 13 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 3 of 3 covered evidence groups point the same way. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
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 VXUS.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 29 – Oct 28VXUS lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 13 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- VXUS +13
- 64 vs 51
- 7 sessions ago
- VXUS +12
- 59 vs 47
- 30 sessions ago
- VXUS +12
- 62 vs 50
- 90 sessions ago
- VXUS +4
- 67 vs 63
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.
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral
Only VXUS
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (2.82%)
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (1.03%)
1 bullish / 2 bearish, conflicted
Only XME
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (3.78%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 1 more signal that do not separate them: MACD Bullish Crossover.
XME is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 3 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -1.53%, AIQ +3 points).
Price is down while the AIQ Score moved up 1 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -3.2%, 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.
- 1XME closes the Risk Resilience gap — currently 37 points behind, the largest single contributor to VXUS's edge.
- 2XME's Death Cross Active resolves — a bearish trend rule currently active against it.
- 3VXUS's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 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
VXUS leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | VXUS | XME |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.3% | 0% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1.4% | -2.2% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -1.2% | -0.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 3.1% | -11.6% |
| Year to date | 11% | -2.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 11.7% | 1.5% |
Technicals
VXUS has the stronger structure| Metric | VXUS | XME |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 47.3 | 42.9 |
| ADX (14) | 22.4 | 26.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -3.9% | -10.5% |
| Price vs 200-day | 0.5% | -10.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 11.6% | 33.5% |
Risk
VXUS is the more resilient| Metric | VXUS | XME |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.12 | 1.85 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.46 | 0.16 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.68 | 0.26 |
| Max drawdown | -11.4% | -27.7% |
| Current drawdown | -5.3% | -23.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 17.2% | 37.4% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.7% | -3.9% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between VXUS and XME?
XME puts 80% of its assets in Basic Materials, while VXUS spreads across 11 sectors with none above 22%.
How much do VXUS and XME overlap?
VXUS and XME share 0% of their weighted exposure across 0 common holdings. 8,281 holdings are unique to VXUS, and 39 holdings are unique to XME. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Which ETF is more diversified, VXUS or XME?
VXUS holds more positions: 8,821 versus 41 for XME.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
VXUS has the lower expense ratio, 0.05% a year against 0.35% for XME.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
VXUS, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 2.37% against 0.34% for XME.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
XME has been more volatile over the past year, at 37.4% 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 -37.3% for XME.
Compare VXUS and XME 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.