Core Insights - The iShares Semiconductor ETF (SOXX) focuses specifically on semiconductor companies, while the State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLK) offers broader exposure to the technology sector at a lower cost [1][5] Fund Comparison - SOXX consists of 30 positions entirely within the technology sector, heavily weighted towards semiconductors, with major holdings in Advanced Micro Devices, Broadcom, and Nvidia [2] - XLK holds approximately 70 stocks, covering a wide range of technology subindustries, including hardware, software, IT services, and communications equipment, with top positions in Nvidia (13.72%), Apple (12.82%), and Microsoft (11.17%) [3] Performance Metrics - SOXX has achieved a five-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 21.1%, but has also faced significant volatility, including a maximum drawdown of over 45% in 2022 [6] - XLK has a five-year CAGR of 18.6% and a maximum drawdown of 33.5%, indicating greater stability compared to SOXX [7] Cost and Yield - The expense ratio for SOXX is 0.34%, while XLK is significantly lower at 0.08%, with yields of 0.62% for SOXX and 0.55% for XLK [4][6] Investor Suitability - More conservative investors may prefer XLK due to its lower fees and reduced historical drawdowns, while aggressive investors might be attracted to SOXX's higher returns and concentrated sector focus [8]

Explore how each ETF’s unique approach to global real estate shapes risk, diversification, and portfolio fit for investors.The main differences between FlexShares Global Quality Real Estate Index Fund (GQRE +0.17%) and Vanguard Global ex-U.S. Real Estate ETF (VNQI +0.11%) come down to cost, geographic exposure, and recent performance, with VNQI offering a lower fee and wider international diversification.Both GQRE and VNQI aim to give investors access to real estate equities, but their approaches diverge: G ...

Core Insights - The Schwab U.S. Broad Market ETF (SCHB) and iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF (ITOT) are both low-cost, ultra-diversified U.S. equity ETFs with nearly identical performance metrics and sector allocations, but ITOT has a larger asset base and higher trading volume [2][4][8] Cost and Size - Both SCHB and ITOT have an expense ratio of 0.03% and a dividend yield of 1.1%, making them comparable in terms of fees and payouts [5] - As of late 2025, SCHB has $38.3 billion in assets under management (AUM), while ITOT has $80.4 billion, indicating ITOT's larger market presence [4][8] Performance and Risk Comparison - Over a five-year period, both ETFs experienced a maximum drawdown of -25.36%, demonstrating similar risk profiles [6] - A $1,000 investment in SCHB would have grown to $1,758, while the same investment in ITOT would have grown to $1,752, reflecting nearly identical performance [6] Portfolio Composition - ITOT holds 2,498 stocks, with sector allocations of 33% in technology, 13% in financial services, and 10% in consumer cyclical, featuring top positions in Nvidia (6.91%), Apple (6.03%), and Microsoft (5.41%) [7] - SCHB has 2,408 holdings with similar sector allocations: 34% in technology, 13% in financial services, and 10% in consumer cyclical, with comparable top positions in Nvidia, Apple, and Microsoft [8]

Core Insights - The article compares two ETFs, SPDR Portfolio S&P 500 ETF (SPYM) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV), highlighting their differences in cost, scale, performance, and portfolio composition to guide investors in their decision-making process [1][2] Cost and Size - SPYM has a lower expense ratio of 0.02% compared to IVV's 0.03%, making it slightly more affordable for investors [3][8] - Both ETFs have identical dividend yields of 1.13% and have shown the same 1-year return of 16.8% as of January 3, 2025 [3] - IVV has significantly higher assets under management (AUM) at $733 billion compared to SPYM's $97 billion, providing greater liquidity [3][9] Performance and Risk Comparison - Over a 5-year period, a $1,000 investment would have grown to $1,829 in SPYM and $1,828 in IVV, indicating nearly identical performance [4] - The maximum drawdown for SPYM is -24.49% while IVV's is -24.50%, showing comparable risk profiles [4] Portfolio Composition - IVV holds 503 U.S. large-cap stocks, with 35% in technology, 13% in financial services, and 11% in communication services, featuring top holdings like Nvidia, Apple, and Microsoft [5] - SPYM has a similar sector allocation and top holdings as IVV, designed for broad, low-cost exposure to the S&P 500 without unique overlays [6][7]

Core Insights - The iShares Semiconductor ETF (SOXX) focuses specifically on the semiconductor sector, while the State Street Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLK) provides diversified exposure across the entire technology sector [2][8] Cost & Size - SOXX has an expense ratio of 0.34% and assets under management (AUM) of $17 billion, while XLK has a lower expense ratio of 0.08% and AUM of $93 billion [3][4] - Both funds have similar dividend yields, with SOXX at 0.55% and XLK at 0.53% [4] Performance & Risk Comparison - Over the past five years, a $1,000 investment in SOXX would have grown to $2,483, compared to $2,220 for XLK [5] - SOXX experienced a maximum drawdown of -45.75%, while XLK had a lower maximum drawdown of -33.56%, indicating higher risk for SOXX due to its narrower focus [5] Holdings Overview - XLK tracks the Technology Select Sector Index, including 70 leading U.S. technology stocks, with top holdings like Nvidia, Apple, and Microsoft making up nearly 40% of its assets [6][7] - SOXX is concentrated on the semiconductor industry, holding only 30 companies, with major positions in Nvidia, Advanced Micro Devices, and Micron Technology [7]

Core Insights - The Schwab U.S. Broad Market ETF (SCHB) and the Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) are designed to replicate the entire U.S. stock market, serving as foundational elements for diversified investment portfolios [2] Cost & Size - Both SCHB and VTI have an expense ratio of 0.03% and a dividend yield of 1.11%, indicating they are equally affordable [3][4] - As of January 2, 2026, SCHB has an AUM of $38 billion, while VTI has a significantly larger AUM of $567 billion [3] Performance & Risk Comparison - Over a five-year period, SCHB experienced a maximum drawdown of -25.40%, while VTI had a slightly lower drawdown of -25.36% [5] - An investment of $1,000 would grow to $1,734 in SCHB and $1,728 in VTI over the same period, showing comparable performance [5] Portfolio Composition - VTI tracks a broader index with 3,527 stocks, heavily weighted towards technology (35% of total assets), with significant holdings in financial services and consumer cyclicals [6] - SCHB holds a narrower selection of 2,407 stocks, with a similar technology weighting of 34% [7] Investor Implications - Both ETFs offer identical expense ratios, dividend yields, and risk levels, making them nearly indistinguishable in terms of fees and income [10] - VTI's larger scale and higher trading volume may attract investors who prioritize liquidity and efficient trade execution [8]

Key Points VNQ charges a lower expense ratio and offers a higher dividend yield than ICF. VNQ holds over five times as many positions, with more diversified sector exposure compared to ICF’s concentrated REIT lineup. Both funds saw similar five-year drawdowns, but ICF slightly outperformed on cumulative growth over that period. These 10 stocks could mint the next wave of millionaires › The most notable differences between iShares Select U.S. REIT ETF (NYSEMKT:ICF) and Vanguard Real Estate ETF (N ...

Core Viewpoint - The Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) and the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY) are both designed to replicate the performance of the S&P 500 Index, but they differ in costs, returns, risk, and portfolio details, which may be significant for long-term investors [1]. Cost & Size Comparison - SPY has an expense ratio of 0.09%, while VOO has a lower expense ratio of 0.03%, making VOO more cost-effective for investors [2]. - As of January 1, 2026, both SPY and VOO have a 1-year return of 16.3% [2]. - VOO offers a slightly higher dividend yield of 1.12% compared to SPY's 1.06% [2]. Performance & Risk Comparison - Both SPY and VOO have a maximum drawdown of -24.5% over the past five years [3]. - The growth of $1,000 invested over five years is $1,824 for SPY and $1,825 for VOO, indicating nearly identical performance [3]. Portfolio Composition - VOO tracks the S&P 500 Index and holds 505 stocks, with significant allocations in technology (37%), financial services (13%), and consumer cyclical (11%) [4]. - The largest positions in VOO are Nvidia, Apple, and Microsoft, and the fund has been operational for over 15 years without employing leverage or special strategies [4]. Similarities and Differences - SPY offers nearly identical exposure to VOO, with the same top holdings and sector allocations, avoiding non-standard index tracking [5]. - The main differences between SPY and VOO lie in fees, yield, and liquidity, with VOO having a slight advantage in all these areas [6]. Investor Implications - For every $10,000 invested, VOO charges $3 in fees compared to SPY's $9, which can accumulate significantly for long-term investors [7]. - VOO's higher dividend yield can result in hundreds or thousands of dollars more in dividend income for investors holding many shares [8]. - VOO's larger assets under management (AUM) of $1.5 trillion compared to SPY's $701 billion may provide more liquidity, facilitating easier buying and selling without impacting the ETF's price [9]. Conclusion - While SPY remains a strong investment option, VOO offers advantages in minimizing fees and slightly higher dividend income, making it a preferable choice for cost-conscious long-term investors [10].

Core Insights - The Vanguard Information Technology ETF (VGT) and the iShares US Technology ETF (IYW) are both designed for investors seeking exposure to leading technology companies, but they differ in cost, diversification, and performance [2] Cost & Size - IYW has an expense ratio of 0.38% and assets under management (AUM) of $21 billion, while VGT has a lower expense ratio of 0.09% and AUM of $130 billion [3] - The one-year return for IYW is 23.99%, compared to VGT's 20.12%, and VGT offers a higher dividend yield of 0.41% versus IYW's 0.14% [3][4] Performance & Risk Comparison - Over five years, IYW has a maximum drawdown of -39.44% compared to VGT's -35.08%, and $1,000 invested in IYW would grow to $2,347, while the same investment in VGT would grow to $2,133 [5] Holdings & Diversification - VGT holds 322 stocks, primarily mega-cap companies like Nvidia, Apple, and Microsoft, providing diversified exposure to the tech industry [6] - IYW is narrower with 141 stocks, having similar top holdings but with smaller portions compared to VGT [7] Investment Implications - VGT's lower expense ratio and higher yield may attract cost-conscious investors, while IYW has shown stronger five-year growth but with higher volatility [9] - Both ETFs have similar total returns over the last 12 months and five years, but VGT offers greater diversification with nearly 200 more holdings than IYW [10][11]

Key Points VTI covers the entire U.S. stock market with a strong tilt toward technology, while VTV focuses on large-cap value stocks led by financials and healthcare. VTI delivered higher one-year and five-year returns, but it experienced a steeper drawdown than VTV. Both funds are extremely low-cost, but VTV offers nearly double the dividend yield compared to VTI. These 10 stocks could mint the next wave of millionaires › The Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (NYSEMKT:VTI) and the Vanguard Value ...