FZROX vs VTI

The Fidelity ZERO Total Market Index Fund (FZROX) and the Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) are two of the largest “total market” index funds in existence and easily two of the most popular among individual investors. VTI and FZROX are the core of many investor portfolios and many investors compare FZROX vs VTI in order to decide which should be the foundation of their portfolio.

A quick reminder that this site does NOT provide investment recommendations. Fund comparisons (such as this one) are not conducted to identify the “best” fund (since that will vary from investor to investor based on investor-specific factors). Rather, these fund comparison posts are designed to identify and distinguish between the fund details that matter versus the ones that don’t.

The Short Answer

FZROX and VTI are extremely similar, except for two major differences. In my view, the major difference is that FZROX can only be bought and/or owned at Fidelity (which is a non-starter for many investors, including myself even if my accounts were at Fidelity). Secondly, FZROX is a mutual fund and VTI is an ETF. This difference in structure leads to differences in taxes, tradability, etc.

The underlying benchmark indices that these funds track are technically different (CRSP US Total Market Index vs Fidelity US Total Investable Market Index), but they are identical is most respects. Consequently, the risk and return of FZROX and VTI is nearly identical and I consider these two funds equivalent and interchangeable.

The Longer Answer

These two funds are incredibly similar and leads some to question: is FZROX the same as VTI?

Technically, VTI is a different fund with a different structure than FZROX. But for many intents and purposes, VTI and FZROX are identical. Both funds are broad-based indices that represent the US equity markets.

Historical Performance: FZROX vs VTI

VTI was launched in 2001, while FZROX was launched on August 2, 2018. Since that time, the two funds have had nearly identical performance: 8.23% vs 8.12% on an annualized basis. Over those 11 years, the cumulative performance differential has been only been about .6%!

Differences Between FZROX and VTI

Geography

Both the VTI and FZROX only include stocks of US-domiciled companies.

Market Capitalization

The two funds have quite a different number of holdings (as of 11/30/2022); VTI holds 4,026 stocks versus FZROX’s 2,822 stocks. However, the market cap weighting of the funds are essentially identical.

VTIFZROX
Large Cap73%73%
Mid Cap19%19%
Small Cap9%9%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar.com (as of 11/30/2022)

Sector Weights

The sector weights of each fund are identical, with many sector weights within .10% of each other!

VTIFZROX
Basic Materials2.65%2.67%
Consumer Cyclical10.35%10.47%
Financial Services13.90%14.01%
Real Estate3.48%3.46%
Communication Services6.89%6.90%
Energy5.09%5.14%
Industrials9.80%9.59%
Technology23.04%23.15%
Consumer Defensive6.80%6.79%
Healthcare15.09%14.95%
Utilities2.91%2.87%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar.com (as of 1/6/23 for VTI and 11/30/2022 for FZROX)

Factors to Consider

Expenses

FZROX grabbed headlines when Fidelity announced it, due to the 0% expense ratio. While zero expenses is great, it is only .03% less than VTI. So even though the difference in expenses is infinite in relative terms, its only three basis points. At a certain level (such as this one), differences in expense ratios do not matter. Since these portfolios are essentially identical, I would most likely lean towards VTI.

Tradability

In my view, the most important factor to consider when evaluating VTI vs FZROX is the fact that FZROX cannot be bought or owned outside of Fidelity. Personally, this is a non-starter for me as there are reasons to transfer assets to other custodians, such as transferring one’s accounts or making a donation. Some investors may not value flexibility as much, but they should be aware of this limitation.

Transaction Costs

ETFs are free to trade at many brokers and custodians, although many still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. As mentioned, FZROX can only be bought and/or held at Fidelity. So if an investor account is at Fidelity, it is free to trade FZROX or VTI. However, only VTI is free to trade in non-Fidelity accounts (or even traded at all!).

There is a bid-ask spread when trading ETFs, but this spread is typically less than .01% for VTI and individual investor trades will not generally be large enough to “move” the market. In the case of VTI, individual investors should not have a problem trading.

Tax Efficiency & Capital Gain Distributions

ETFs are typically more tax-efficient than mutual funds, due to their ability to avoid realizing capital gains through like-kind redemptions (a process that is beyond the scope of this post).

FZROX routinely makes capital gains distributions, while VTI does not make capital gains distributions nor do I expect it to (since it is an ETF). FZROX is relatively tax-efficient since it is an index fund, but VTI is even more tax-efficient.

Tax Loss Harvesting

My personal preference is to keep a portfolio entirely mutual funds or entirely ETFs, due to the mechanics of settlement during tax loss harvesting. If an ETF has declined in value and an investor sells it, the trade and cash proceeds will not settle for two business days (T+2). That investor may want to “replace” the sold ETF immediately and attempt to buy another ETF or mutual fund simultaneously.

However, mutual funds settle on T+1 basis, so cash for the mutual purchase would be due in one business day (which is one day earlier than the cash from the ETF sale is received). This can obviously cause problems and (even though this issue can be addressed with careful planning) I find it easier to keep accounts invested in similar vehicles. In this case, if a portfolio is all mutual funds, I might consider FZROX. If all ETFs, I might lean more towards VTI.

FZROX vs VTI: The Bottom Line

FZROX and VTI are nearly identical in most respects. Personally, I would not spend too much time trying to divine which is “better” and would just choose whether a mutual fund or ETF makes more sense for my portfolio based on the above factors.

That being said, investors should not consider FZROX unless their account is at Fidelity. If my accounts were at Fidelity, I might consider FZROX in a tax-exempt or tax-deferred account. However, I would never buy FZROX in a taxable account due to the inability to transfer the assets (without realizing a potential gain) out of Fidelity if I wanted to move my accounts, donate the shares, etc.

For those asking: which is better, VTI or FZROX? I believe VTI is better than FZROX in most situations.

FZROX vs VTSAX: Which Fund is Best?

The Fidelity ZERO Total Market Index Fund (FZROX) and the Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund (VTSAX) are two of the largest “total market” index funds in existence and easily two of the most popular among individual investors. VTSAX and FZROX are the core of many investor portfolios and many investors compare FZROX vs VTSAX in order to decide which should be the foundation of their portfolio.

A quick reminder that this site does NOT provide investment recommendations. Fund comparisons (such as this one) are not conducted to identify the “best” fund (since that will vary from investor to investor based on investor-specific factors). Rather, these fund comparison posts are designed to identify and distinguish between the fund details that matter versus the ones that don’t.

The Short Answer

FZROX and VTSAX are extremely similar, except for one major differences. The major difference is that FZROX can only be bought and/or owned at Fidelity (which is a non-starter for many investors, including myself even if my accounts were at Fidelity).

The underlying benchmark indices that these funds track are technically different (CRSP US Total Market Index vs Fidelity US Total Investable Market Index), but they are identical is most respects. Consequently, the risk and return of FZROX and VTSAX is nearly identical and I consider these two funds equivalent and interchangeable.

The Longer Answer

Historical Performance: FZROX vs VTSAX

VTSAX was launched in back in 2000, while FZROX was launched on August 2, 2018. Since that time, the two funds have had near identical performance: 8.23% vs 8.11% on an annualized basis. Over those years, the cumulative performance differential has been less than .7%!

Differences Between FZROX and VTSAX

Geography

Both the VTSAX and FZROX only include stocks of US-domiciled companies.

Market Capitalization

The two funds have quite a different number of holdings (as of 11/30/2022); VTSAX holds 4,026 stocks versus FZROX’s 2,822 stocks. However, the market cap weighting of the funds are identical.

VTSAXFZROX
Large Cap73%73%
Mid Cap19%19%
Small Cap9%9%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar.com (as of 11/30/2022)

Sector Weights

The sector weights of each fund are identical, with many sector weights within .10% of each other!

VTSAXFZROX
Basic Materials2.65%2.67%
Consumer Cyclical10.35%10.47%
Financial Services13.90%14.01%
Real Estate3.48%3.46%
Communication Services6.89%6.90%
Energy5.09%5.14%
Industrials9.80%9.59%
Technology23.04%23.15%
Consumer Defensive6.80%6.79%
Healthcare15.09%14.95%
Utilities2.91%2.87%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar.com (as of 11/30/2022)

Factors to Consider

Expenses

FZROX grabbed headlines when Fidelity announced it, due to the 0% expense ratio. While zero expenses is great, it is only .03% less than VTSAX. So even though the difference in expenses is infinite in relative terms, its only three basis points. At a certain level (such as this one), differences in expense ratios do not matter. Since these portfolios are essentially identical, I would most likely lean towards VTSAX.

Tradability

In my view, the most important factor to consider when evaluating VTSAX vs FZROX is the fact that FZROX cannot be bought or owned outside of Fidelity. Personally, this is a non-starter for me as there are reasons to transfer assets to other custodians, such as transferring one’s accounts or making a donation. Some investors may not value flexibility as much, but they should be aware of this limitation.

Transaction Costs

ETFs are free to trade at many brokers and custodians, although many still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. As mentioned, FZROX can only be bought and/or held at Fidelity. So if an investor account is at Fidelity, it is free to trade FZROX but trading VTSAX will cost money.

To my knowledge, Vanguard does not participate in the pay-to-play arrangements that would allow their mutual funds to trade for free on many platforms. So only accounts at Vanguard can trade VTSAX (but they cannot trade FZROX at all!).

Investors looking for an ETF may want to consider VTI, the ETF share class of VTSAX (read our review of VTI vs FZROX here). There is a bid-ask spread when trading ETFs, but this spread is typically less than .01% for VTSAX and individual investor trades will not generally be large enough to “move” the market. In the case of VTSAX, individual investors should not have a problem trading.

Tax Efficiency & Capital Gain Distributions

FZROX routinely makes capital gains distributions, while VTSAX does not make capital gains distributions (nor do I expect it to, due to Vanguard’s fund structure). FZROX is relatively tax-efficient since it is an index fund, but VTSAX is even more tax-efficient.

Final Thoughts on FZROX & VTSAX

FZROX and VTSAX are nearly identical in most respects. Personally, I would not spend too much time trying to divine which fund is “better.”

That being said, investors should not consider FZROX unless their account is at Fidelity. If my accounts were at Fidelity, I might consider FZROX in a tax-exempt or tax-deferred account. However, I would never buy FZROX in a taxable account due to the inability to transfer the assets (without realizing a potential gain) out of Fidelity if I wanted to move my accounts, donate the shares, etc. Therefore, I believe VTSAX is the better choice for most situations, although investor may want to look at similar ETFs too.

FZROX vs FXAIX

The Fidelity S&P 500 Index mutual fund (FXAIX) and the Fidelity ZERO Total Market Index fund (FZROX) are two of the largest mutual funds in existence. FXAIX and FZROX are the core of many investor portfolios. Many investors compare FXAIX vs FZROX in order to decide which should be the foundation of their portfolio.

A quick reminder that this site does NOT provide investment recommendations. Fund comparisons (such as this one) are not conducted to identify the “best” fund (since that will vary from investor to investor based on investor-specific factors). Rather, these fund comparison posts are designed to identify and distinguish between the fund details that matter versus the ones that don’t.

The Short Answer

There are two main differences between FXAIX and FZROX. Firstly, and perhaps most importantly, FZROX can only be bought and owned at Fidelity. Secondly, FXAIX is a large- and mid-cap fund, while FZROX is a total market fund. Despite these differences, the total return between these two funds is pretty close.

The Long Answer

Historical Performance: FXAIX vs FZROX

FXAIX was launched back in 1988, while FZROX was launched on August 2, 2018. Since then, FXAIX has outperformed by about a .75% annually. This is not a huge performance differential, but it does compound over time. The cumulative difference between the two funds since common inception is approximately 4.25%.

Of course, the outperformance of FXAIX is reflective of large-cap stocks’ dominance over the past decade. If mid-caps and/or small-caps lead, then I suspect FZROX would outperform.

Differences between FXAIX vs FZROX

The biggest difference between FXAIX and FZROX is the market cap exposure of the funds. FXAIX tracks the S&P 500 index which includes mostly large-caps and some mid-caps, while FZROX covers much more of the market by including more mid-caps and small-caps.

Geographic Exposure

Both FXAIX and FZROX hold essentially 100% stocks, so I will not dig into country exposures or market classification here. For intents and purposes, the two funds have identical exposures.

Market Cap Exposure

FXAIX focuses on the S&P 500 index and so it mostly holds large-caps with a bit of mid-cap exposure. FZROX tracks the broader Dow Jones U.S. Total Stock Market Index and so it owns many more mid-caps and small-caps (as of 11/30/2022). In other words, FXAIX is a large-cap vehicle, while FZROX is a total market vehicle. That being said, due to market cap weighting, both funds are overwhelmingly influenced by the large-cap holdings.

FXAIXFZROX
Large-Cap83%73%
Mid-Cap16%19%
Small-Cap0%9%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar

Sector Weights

The sector weights between FXAIX and FZROX are nearly identical, as of 11/30/2022. The weights are within 1% for every single sector.

FXAIXFZROX
Basic Materials2.40%2.67%
Consumer Cyclical10.16%10.47%
Financial Services13.80%14.01%
Real Estate2.77%3.46%
Communication Services7.46%6.90%
Energy5.12%5.14%
Industrials8.86%9.59%
Technology23.72%23.15%
Consumer Defensive7.40%6.79%
Healthcare15.31%14.95%
Utilities2.99%2.87%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar

Factors to Consider

Tradability

In my view, the most important factor to consider when evaluating FXAIX vs FZROX is the fact that FZROX cannot be bought or owned outside of Fidelity. Personally, this is a non-starter for me as there are reasons to transfer assets to other custodians, such as transferring one’s accounts or making a donation. Some investors may not value flexibility as much, but they should be aware of this limitation.

Transaction Costs

Many brokers and custodians still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. To my knowledge, Fidelity does not participate in the pay-to-play arrangements (with their competitor custodians) that would allow their mutual funds to trade for free on many platforms. So if an investor account is at Fidelity, it is generally free to trade FXAIX or FZROX. Other custodians will likely charge a fee to trade FXAIX and will not allow FZROX trades at all!

It is worth noting that neither fund has a minimum for initial or additional investments. That being said, investors looking for free trades may want to consider an a total market ETF or large-cap ETF, rather than FZROX or FXAIX.

Expenses

FZROX grabbed headlines when Fidelity announced it, due to the 0% expense ratio. While zero expenses is great, it is only .015% less than FXAIX. So even though the difference in expenses is infinite in relative terms, its only a basis point and a half difference. At a certain level (such as this one), differences in expense ratios do not matter.

Tax Efficiency & Capital Gain Distributions

Both funds have made capital gains distributions in the past and will likely make them in the future. It is not possible to say which one will be more tax-efficient in the future. As index funds, the tax drag on both funds is very low. However, tax-sensitive taxable investors may want to consider using an ETF in lieu of either of these funds.

Final Thoughts: FZROX vs FXAIX

Both FXAIX and FZROX are large, core funds sponsored and managed by one of the largest asset managers in the world (Fidelity). Beyond market cap exposures, the funds appear and act very similar. Long-term performance has been nearly identical. I view these two funds as essentially interchangeable and would not spend too much energy splitting hairs to decide which one is “better.”

Should I invest in FZROX or FXAIX?

I believe FXAIX is the better choice for most situations, although investors may want to look at similar ETFs too.

Investors should not consider FZROX at all unless their account is at Fidelity. If my accounts were at Fidelity, I might consider FZROX in a tax-exempt or tax-deferred account. However, I would never buy FZROX in a taxable account due to the inability to transfer the assets (without realizing a potential gain) out of Fidelity if I wanted to move my accounts, donate the shares, etc.

FZROX vs SWTSX

The Fidelity ZERO Total Market Index Fund (FZROX) and the Schwab Total Stock Market Index Fund (SWTSX) are two of the largest “total market” index funds in existence and easily two of the most popular among individual investors. SWTSX and FZROX are the core of many investor portfolios and many investors compare FZROX vs SWTSX in order to decide which should be the foundation of their portfolio.

A quick reminder that this site does NOT provide investment recommendations. Fund comparisons (such as this one) are not conducted to identify the “best” fund (since that will vary from investor to investor based on investor-specific factors). Rather, these fund comparison posts are designed to identify and distinguish between the fund details that matter versus the ones that don’t.

The Short Answer

FZROX and SWTSX are extremely similar, except for one major difference which is that FZROX can only be bought and/or owned at Fidelity (which is a non-starter for many investors, including myself even if my accounts were at Fidelity).

The underlying benchmark indices that these funds track are technically different (Dow Jones US Total Stock Market Index vs Fidelity US Total Investable Market Index), but they are identical is most respects. Consequently, the risk and return of FZROX and SWTSX is nearly identical and I consider these two funds equivalent and interchangeable.

The Longer Answer

Historical Performance: FZROX vs SWTSX

SWTSX was launched way back in 1999, while FZROX was launched on August 2, 2018. Since that time, the two funds have had near identical performance: 8.23% vs 8.02% on an annualized basis. Over those years, the cumulative performance differential has been only been about 1.2%!

Differences Between FZROX and SWTSX

Geography

Both the SWTSX and FZROX only include stocks of US-domiciled companies.

Market Capitalization

The two funds have different numbers of holdings (as of 11/30/2022); SWTSX holds 3,516 stocks versus FZROX’s 2,822 stocks. However, the market cap weighting of the funds are identical.

SWTSXFZROX
Large Cap72%73%
Mid Cap19%19%
Small Cap9%9%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar.com (as of 11/30/2022)

Sector Weights

The sector weights of each fund are identical, with many sector weights within .10% of each other!

SWTSXFZROX
Basic Materials2.65%2.67%
Consumer Cyclical9.86%10.47%
Financial Services14.08%14.01%
Real Estate3.50%3.46%
Communication Services6.74%6.90%
Energy5.20%5.14%
Industrials9.79%9.59%
Technology22.62%23.15%
Consumer Defensive6.95%6.79%
Healthcare15.58%14.95%
Utilities3.04%2.87%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar.com (data as of 12/31/22 for SWTSX and 11/30/22 for FZROX)

Factors to Consider

Expenses

FZROX grabbed headlines when Fidelity announced it, due to the 0% expense ratio. While zero expenses is great, it is only .02% less than SWTSX. So even though the difference in expenses is infinite in relative terms, its only three basis points. At a certain level (such as this one), differences in expense ratios do not matter. Since these portfolios are essentially identical, I would most likely lean towards SWTSX.

Tradability

In my view, the most important factor to consider when evaluating SWTSX vs FZROX is the fact that FZROX cannot be bought or owned outside of Fidelity. Personally, this is a non-starter for me as there are reasons to transfer assets to other custodians, such as transferring one’s accounts or making a donation. Some investors may not value flexibility as much, but they should be aware of this limitation.

Transaction Costs

ETFs are free to trade at many brokers and custodians, although many still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. As mentioned, FZROX can only be bought and/or held at Fidelity. So if an investor account is at Fidelity, it is free to trade FZROX but trading SWTSX will cost money.

To my knowledge, Schwab does not participate in the pay-to-play arrangements that would allow their mutual funds to trade for free on many platforms. So only accounts at Schwab can trade SWTSX for free and accounts outside of Fidelity cannot trade FZROX at all.

Investors looking for an ETF may want to consider VTI (read our review of VTI vs FZROX here). There is a bid-ask spread when trading ETFs, but this spread is typically less than .01% for SWTSX and individual investor trades will not generally be large enough to “move” the market. In the case of VTI, individual investors should not have a problem trading.

Tax Efficiency & Capital Gain Distributions

Both FZROX and SWTSX routinely make capital gains distributions, so they should be fairly equivalent in terms of tax-efficiency.

Final Thoughts on FZROX & SWTSX

FZROX and SWTSX are nearly identical in most respects. Personally, I would not spend too much time trying to divine which fund is “better.”

That being said, investors should not consider FZROX unless their account is at Fidelity. If my accounts were at Fidelity, I might consider FZROX in a tax-exempt or tax-deferred account. However, I would never buy FZROX in a taxable account due to the inability to transfer the assets (without realizing a potential gain) out of Fidelity if I wanted to move my accounts, donate the shares, etc. Therefore, I believe SWTSX is the better choice for most situations, although investor may want to look at similar ETFs too.

FZROX vs SWPPX

The Schwab S&P 500 Index mutual fund (SWPPX) and the Fidelity ZERO Total Market Index fund (FZROX) are two of the largest mutual funds in existence. SWPPX and FZROX are the core of many investor portfolios. Many investors compare SWPPX vs FZROX in order to decide which should be the foundation of their portfolio.

A quick reminder that this site does NOT provide investment recommendations. Fund comparisons (such as this one) are not conducted to identify the “best” fund (since that will vary from investor to investor based on investor-specific factors). Rather, these fund comparison posts are designed to identify and distinguish between the fund details that matter versus the ones that don’t.

The Short Answer

There are two main differences between SWPPX and FZROX. Firstly, and perhaps most importantly, FZROX can only be bought and owned in Fidelity accounts. Secondly, SWPPX is a large- and mid-cap fund, while FZROX is a total market fund. Despite these differences, the total return between these two funds is pretty close.

The Long Answer

Historical Performance: SWPPX vs FZROX

SWPPX was launched back in 1997, while FZROX was launched on August 2, 2018. Since then, SWPPX has outperformed by about a .7% annually. This is not a huge performance differential, but it does compound over time. The cumulative difference between the two funds since common inception is approximately 4%.

Of course, the outperformance of SWPPX is reflective of large-cap stocks’ dominance over the past five years. If mid-caps and/or small-caps lead, then I suspect FZROX would outperform.

Differences between SWPPX vs FZROX

The biggest difference between SWPPX and FZROX is the market cap exposure of the funds. SWPPX tracks the S&P 500 index which includes mostly large-caps and some mid-caps, while FZROX covers much more of the market by including more mid-caps and small-caps.

Geographic Exposure

Both SWPPX and FZROX hold essentially 100% stocks, so I will not dig into country exposures or market classification here. For intents and purposes, the two funds have identical exposures.

Market Cap Exposure

SWPPX focuses on the S&P 500 index and so it mostly holds large-caps with a bit of mid-cap exposure. FZROX tracks the broader Dow Jones U.S. Total Stock Market Index and so it owns many more mid-caps and small-caps (as of 11/30/2022). In other words, SWPPX is a large-cap vehicle, while FZROX is a total market vehicle. That being said, due to market cap weighting, both funds are overwhelmingly influenced by the large-cap holdings.

SWPPXFZROX
Large-Cap83%73%
Mid-Cap16%19%
Small-Cap0%9%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar

Sector Weights

The sector weights between SWPPX and FZROX are nearly identical. The weights are within 1% for every single sector.

SWPPXFZROX
Basic Materials2.46%2.67%
Consumer Cyclical9.56%10.47%
Financial Services13.89%14.01%
Real Estate2.81%3.46%
Communication Services7.28%6.90%
Energy5.23%5.14%
Industrials9.06%9.59%
Technology23.02%23.15%
Consumer Defensive7.61%6.79%
Healthcare15.90%14.95%
Utilities3.18%2.87%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar (data as of 12/31/22 for SWPPX and 11/30/22 for FZROX)

Factors to Consider

Tradability

In my view, the most important factor to consider when evaluating SWPPX vs FZROX is the fact that FZROX cannot be bought or owned outside of Fidelity. Personally, this is a non-starter for me as there are reasons to transfer assets to other custodians, such as transferring one’s accounts or making a donation. Some investors may not value flexibility as much, but they should be aware of this limitation.

Transaction Costs

Many brokers and custodians still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. To my knowledge, neither Schwab nor Fidelity participates in the pay-to-play arrangements (with their competitor custodians) that would allow their mutual funds to trade for free on many platforms. So if an investor account is at Fidelity, it is generally free to trade FZROX; likewise, accounts at Schwab can generally trade SWPPX for free. SWPPX will likely incur trading fees anywhere outside of Schwab, while FZROX cannot be traded at all outside of Fidelity.

It is worth noting that neither fund has a minimum for initial or additional investments. That being said, investors looking for free trades may want to consider an a total market ETF or large-cap ETF, rather than FZROX or SWPPX.

Expenses

FZROX grabbed headlines when Fidelity announced it, due to the 0% expense ratio. While zero expenses is great, it is only .02% less than SWPPX. So even though the difference in expenses is infinite in relative terms, its only two basis points. At a certain level (such as this one), differences in expense ratios do not matter.

Tax Efficiency & Capital Gain Distributions

Both funds have made capital gains distributions in the past and will likely make them in the future. It is not possible to say which one will be more tax-efficient in the future. As index funds, the tax drag on both funds is very low. However, tax-sensitive taxable investors may want to consider using an ETF in lieu of either of these funds.

Final Thoughts: SWPPX vs FZROX

Both SWPPX and FZROX are large, core funds sponsored and managed by two of the largest asset managers in the world (Fidelity and Schwab respectively). Beyond market cap exposures, the funds appear and act very similar. Long-term performance has been nearly identical. I view these two funds as essentially interchangeable and would not spend too much energy splitting hairs to decide which one is “better.”

Should I invest in FZROX or SWPPX?

Due to the reasons outlined above, I believe SWPPX is a better choice than FZROX for most investors’ situations, although investors may want to look at similar ETFs too.

Investors should not consider FZROX at all unless their account is at Fidelity. If my accounts were at Fidelity, I might consider FZROX in a tax-exempt or tax-deferred account. However, I would never buy FZROX in a taxable account due to the inability to transfer the assets (without realizing a potential gain) out of Fidelity if I wanted to move my accounts, donate the shares, etc.

FZROX vs FNILX

The Fidelity ZERO Large Cap Index mutual fund (FNILX) and the Fidelity ZERO Total Market Index fund (FZROX) are two of the largest mutual funds in existence. FNILX and FZROX are the core of many investor portfolios. Many investors compare FNILX vs FZROX in order to decide which should be the foundation of their portfolio.

A quick reminder that this site does NOT provide investment recommendations. Fund comparisons (such as this one) are not conducted to identify the “best” fund (since that will vary from investor to investor based on investor-specific factors). Rather, these fund comparison posts are designed to identify and distinguish between the fund details that matter versus the ones that don’t.

The Short Answer

What is the difference between FNILX and FZROX?

The main difference between FNILX and FZROX is that FNILX is a large- and mid-cap fund, while FZROX is a total market fund. Despite these differences, the total return between these two funds is pretty close.

Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, both funds can only be bought and owned in Fidelity accounts. Due to this limitation, I would never buy or recommend either of these funds.

The Long Answer

Historical Performance: FNILX vs FZROX

Both FNILX and FZROX were launched in 2018. Since their common inception, FNILX has outperformed by about a half percent annually. This is not a huge performance differential, but it does compound over time. The cumulative difference between the two funds since common inception is approximately 3%.

Of course, the outperformance of FNILX is reflective of large-cap stocks’ dominance over the past five years. If mid-caps and/or small-caps lead, then I suspect FZROX would outperform.

Differences between FNILX vs FZROX

The biggest difference between FNILX and FZROX is the market cap exposure of the funds. FNILX tracks the S&P 500 index which includes mostly large-caps and some mid-caps, while FZROX covers much more of the market by including more mid-caps and small-caps.

Geographic Exposure

Both FNILX and FZROX hold essentially 100% stocks, so I will not dig into country exposures or market classification here. For intents and purposes, the two funds have identical exposures.

Market Cap Exposure

FNILX focuses on the S&P 500 index and so it mostly holds large-caps with a bit of mid-cap exposure. FZROX tracks the broader Dow Jones U.S. Total Stock Market Index and so it owns many more mid-caps and small-caps (as of 11/30/2022). In other words, FNILX is a large-cap vehicle, while FZROX is a total market vehicle. That being said, due to market cap weighting, both funds are overwhelmingly influenced by the large-cap holdings.

FNILXFZROX
Large-Cap83%73%
Mid-Cap16%19%
Small-Cap0%9%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar

Sector Weights

The sector weights between FNILX and FZROX are nearly identical, as of 11/30/2022. The weights are within 1% for every single sector.

FNILXFZROX
Basic Materials2.40%2.67%
Consumer Cyclical10.16%10.47%
Financial Services13.80%14.01%
Real Estate2.77%3.46%
Communication Services7.46%6.90%
Energy5.12%5.14%
Industrials8.86%9.59%
Technology23.72%23.15%
Consumer Defensive7.40%6.79%
Healthcare15.31%14.95%
Utilities2.99%2.87%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar

Factors to Consider

Tradability

In my view, the most important factor to consider when evaluating FNILX vs FZROX is that neither can be bought or owned outside of Fidelity. Personally, this is a non-starter for me as there are reasons to transfer assets to other custodians, such as transferring one’s accounts or making a donation. Some investors may not value flexibility as much, but they should be aware of this limitation.

Transaction Costs

Many brokers and custodians still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. To my knowledge, Fidelity does not participate in the pay-to-play arrangements (with their competitor custodians) that would allow their mutual funds to trade for free on many platforms. So if an investor account is at Fidelity, it is generally free to trade FNILX or FZROX. Other custodians will not allow FNILX or FZROX trades at all!

It is worth noting that neither fund has a minimum for initial or additional investments. That being said, investors looking for free trades may want to consider an a total market ETF or large-cap ETF, rather than FZROX or FNILX.

Expenses

Both FZROX and FNILX grabbed headlines when Fidelity announced it, due to the 0% expense ratio. While zero expenses is great, it is only a few basis points less than similar mutual funds and ETFs. So even though the difference in expenses is infinite in relative terms, its only a few basis points. At a certain level (such as this one), differences in expense ratios do not matter.

Tax Efficiency & Capital Gain Distributions

Both funds have made capital gains distributions in the past and will likely make them in the future. It is not possible to say which one will be more tax-efficient in the future. As index funds, the tax drag on both funds is very low. However, tax-sensitive taxable investors may want to consider using an ETF in lieu of either of these funds.

Final Thoughts: FNILX vs FZROX

Both FNILX and FZROX are large, core funds sponsored and managed by one of the largest asset managers in the world (Fidelity). Beyond market cap exposures, the funds appear and act very similar. Long-term performance has been nearly identical. I view these two funds as essentially interchangeable and would not spend too much energy splitting hairs to decide which one is “better.”

Should I invest in FZROX or FNILX?

I do not believe either fund is appropriate for most investors, except in limited situations. Anyone looking at either of these funds should take a look at these funds competitors, such as VSTAX, SWPPX, VTI, ITOT, and so on.

Investors should not consider either fund unless their account is at Fidelity, as they cannot even buy them. If my accounts were at Fidelity, I might consider the funds in a tax-exempt or tax-deferred account. However, I would never buy them in a taxable account due to the inability to transfer the assets (without realizing a potential gain) out of Fidelity if I wanted to move my accounts, donate the shares, etc.

FXAIX vs FNILX

The Fidelity 500 Index Fund (FXAIX) is one of the largest mutual funds in the world, with multiple share classes that go back decades. In 2018, Fidelity launched the ZERO Large Cap Index Fund (FNILX) which advertises a 0% expense ratio. Investors evaluating FXAIX vs FNILX will be hard-pressed to find many differences beyond the fact that FNILX can only be owned at Fidelity. The funds are nearly identical in every way, except for one major difference: FNILX cannot be bought or owned in non-Fidelity accounts.

A quick reminder that this site does NOT provide investment recommendations. Fund comparisons (such as this one) are not conducted to identify the “best” fund (since that will vary from investor to investor based on investor-specific factors). Rather, these fund comparison posts are designed to identify and distinguish between the fund details that matter versus the ones that don’t.

The Short Answer

There are very few differences between FXAIX and FNILX, except for the fact that FNILX cannot be bought or owned outside of Fidelity.

The underlying benchmark indices that these funds track are technically different (S&P 500 Index vs Fidelity U.S. Large Cap Index), but they are identical is most respects. Consequently, the risk and return of FXAIX and FNILX is nearly identical and I consider these two funds equivalent and interchangeable.

Historical Performance: FXAIX vs FNILX

FXAIX was launched in 1988, while FNILX was launched on September 13, 2018. Since that time, the fund’s have performed nearly identically: 8.62% vs 8.43% annualized. The cumulative performance difference over that time has only been about 1%.

Differences Between FXAIX and FNILX

As the above performance chart shows, the risk and return of the two funds is nearly identical. This is not surprising given the fund composition data below.

Geography

Both the FNILX and FXAIX only include stocks of US-domiciled companies.

Market Capitalization

The two funds have a quite a different number of holdings (as of 11/30/2022); FNILX holds 506 stocks versus FXAIX‘s 503 stocks. However, the market cap weighting of the funds are nearly identical.

FNILXFXAIX
Large Cap84%83%
Mid Cap16%16%
Small Cap0%0%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar.com (as of 11/30/2022)

Sector Weights

The sector weights of each fund are nearly identical with most sector weights within 1% of the other fund.

FNILXFXAIX
Basic Materials2.41%2.40%
Consumer Cyclical9.95%10.16%
Financial Services13.69%13.80%
Real Estate2.64%2.77%
Communication Services7.53%7.46%
Energy5.12%5.12%
Industrials8.48%8.86%
Technology24.76%23.72%
Consumer Defensive7.18%7.40%
Healthcare15.38%15.31%
Utilities2.86%2.99%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar.com (as of 11/30/2022)

Factors to Consider

Tradability

In my view, the most important factor to consider when evaluating FXAIX vs FNILX is the fact that FNILX cannot be bought or owned outside of Fidelity. Personally, this is a non-starter for me as there are reasons to transfer assets to other custodians, such as transferring one’s accounts or making a donation. Some investors may not value flexibility as much, but they should be aware of this limitation.

Expenses

FNILX grabbed headlines when Fidelity announced it, due to the 0% expense ratio. While zero expenses is great, it is only .015% less than FXAIX. So ever though the difference in expenses is infinite in relative terms, its only a basis point and a half difference. At a certain level (such as this one), differences in expense ratios do not matter.

Transaction Costs

ETFs are free to trade at many brokers and custodians, although many still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. To my knowledge, Fidelity does not participate in the pay-to-play arrangements that would allow their mutual funds to trade for free on many platforms. So if an investor account is at Fidelity, it is free to trade FXAIX or FNILX. Outside of Fidelity, investors cannot trade FNILX and will have to pay to trade FXAIX.

Tax Efficiency & Capital Gain Distributions

Both FXAIX and FXROX routinely makes capital gains distributions, although they are relatively small owing to the fact that they are both index funds. Taxable investors may want to consider ETFs which are generally more tax-efficient and can read our reviews of FXAIX vs VOO or FXAIX vs SPY.

Final Thoughts on FXAIX & FNILX

These two funds are nearly identical, except for the fact that FNILX can only be bought and owned at Fidelity. As mentioned above, I view this a severe limitation and would not consider FNILX for my personal portfolio.

FSKAX vs FZROX

The Fidelity Total Stock Market Index Fund (FSKAX) is one of the largest mutual funds in the world, with multiple share classes that go back decades. In 2018, Fidelity launched the ZERO Total Market Index Fund (FZROX) which advertises a 0% expense ratio. Investors evaluating FSKAX vs FZROX will be hard-pressed to find many differences beyond the fact that FZROX can only be owned at Fidelity. The funds are nearly identical in every way, except for one major difference: FZROX cannot be bought or owned in non-Fidelity accounts.

A quick reminder that this site does NOT provide investment recommendations. Fund comparisons (such as this one) are not conducted to identify the “best” fund (since that will vary from investor to investor based on investor-specific factors). Rather, these fund comparison posts are designed to identify and distinguish between the fund details that matter versus the ones that don’t.

The Short Answer

There are very few differences between FSKAX and FZROX, except for the fact that FZROX cannot be bought or owned outside of Fidelity.

The underlying benchmark indices that these funds track are technically different (Dow Jones US Total Market Index vs Fidelity U.S. Total Investable Market Index), but they are identical is most respects. Consequently, the risk and return of FSKAX and FZROX is nearly identical and I consider these two funds equivalent and interchangeable.

Historical Performance: FSKAX vs FZROX

FSKAX was launched in 2011 (although other share classes of the fund go back decades), while FZROX was launched on August 2, 2018. Since that time, the fund’s have performed nearly identically: 8.06% vs 8.23% annualized. The cumulative performance difference over that time has only been about 1%.

Differences Between FSKAX and FZROX

As the above performance chart shows, the risk and return of the two funds is nearly identical. This is not surprising given the fund composition data below.

Geography

Both the FZROX and FSKAX only include stocks of US-domiciled companies.

Market Capitalization

The two funds have a quite a different number of holdings (as of 11/30/2022); FZROX holds 2,822 stocks versus FSKAX’s 3,989 stocks. However, the market cap weighting of the funds are identical.

FZROXFSKAX
Large Cap73%73%
Mid Cap19%19%
Small Cap9%9%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar.com (as of 11/30/2022)

Sector Weights

The sector weights of each fund are nearly identical and every single sector weight is with .05% of the other funds.

FZROXFSKAX
Basic Materials2.67%2.66%
Consumer Cyclical10.47%10.43%
Financial Services14.01%14.04%
Real Estate3.46%3.46%
Communication Services6.90%6.91%
Energy5.14%5.13%
Industrials9.59%9.58%
Technology23.15%23.18%
Consumer Defensive6.79%6.77%
Healthcare14.95%14.97%
Utilities2.87%2.87%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar.com (as of 11/30/2022)

Factors to Consider

Tradability

In my view, the most important factor to consider when evaluating FSKAX vs FZROX is the fact that FZROX cannot be bought or owned outside of Fidelity. Personally, this is a non-starter for me as there are reasons to transfer assets to other custodians, such as transferring one’s accounts or making a donation. Some investors may not value flexibility as much, but they should be aware of this limitation.

Expenses

FZROX grabbed headlines when Fidelity announced it, due to the 0% expense ratio. While zero expenses is great, it is only .015% less than FSKAX. So even though the difference in expenses is infinite in relative terms, its only a basis point and a half difference. At a certain level (such as this one), differences in expense ratios do not matter.

Transaction Costs

ETFs are free to trade at many brokers and custodians, although many still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. To my knowledge, Fidelity does not participate in the pay-to-play arrangements that would allow their mutual funds to trade for free on many platforms. So if an investor account is at Fidelity, it is free to trade FSKAX or FZROX. Outside of Fidelity, investors cannot trade FZROX and will have to pay to trade FSKAX.

Tax Efficiency & Capital Gain Distributions

Both FSKAX and FXROX routinely makes capital gains distributions, although they are relatively small owing to the fact that they are both index funds. Taxable investors may want to consider ETFs which are generally more tax-efficient and can read our reviews of FSKAX vs VTI or VTSAX vs ITOT.

Final Thoughts on FSKAX & FZROX

These two funds are nearly identical, except for the fact that FZROX can only be bought and owned at Fidelity. As mentioned above, I view this a severe limitation and would not consider FZROX for my personal portfolio.

FSKAX vs ITOT

The Fidelity Total Stock Market Index fund (FSKAX) and the iShares Core S&P Total US Stock Market ETF (ITOT) are two of the largest “total market” index funds in existence and easily two of the most popular among individual investors. ITOT and FSKAX are the core of many investor portfolios and many investors compare FSKAX vs ITOT in order to decide which should be the foundation of their portfolio.

A quick reminder that this site does NOT provide investment recommendations. Fund comparisons (such as this one) are not conducted to identify the “best” fund (since that will vary from investor to investor based on investor-specific factors). Rather, these fund comparison posts are designed to identify and distinguish between the fund details that matter versus the ones that don’t.

The Short Answer

There are very few differences between the two funds. In my view, the largest difference is that FSKAX is a mutual fund and ITOT is an ETF. This difference in structure leads to differences in taxes, tradability, etc.

The underlying benchmark indices that these funds track are technically different (S&P Total Market Index vs Dow Jones US Total Market Index), but they are identical is most respects. Consequently, the risk and return of FSKAX and ITOT is nearly identical and I consider these two funds equivalent and interchangeable.

The Longer Answer

These two funds are incredibly similar and leads some to question: is ITOT the same as FSKAX?

Technically, ITOT is a different fund with a different structure than FSKAX. But for many intents and purposes, ITOT and FSKAX are identical. Both funds are broad-based indices that represent the US equity markets.

Historical Performance: FSKAX vs ITOT

ITOT was launched in 2004, while FSKAX was launched on September 7, 2011 (although other share classes of the Fidelity fund existed prior to this date). Since that time, the two funds have had identical performance: 12.65% vs 12.68% on an annualized basis. Over those 11 years, the cumulative performance differential has been only been about 1%!

Differences Between FSKAX and ITOT

Geography

Both the ITOT and FSKAX only include stocks of US-domiciled companies.

Market Capitalization

The two funds have a similar number of holdings (as of 11/30/2022); ITOT holds 3,362 stocks versus FSKAX’s 3,989 stocks. Perhaps not surprisingly, the market cap weighting of the funds are essentially identical.

ITOTFSKAX
Large Cap72%73%
Mid Cap20%19%
Small Cap9%9%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar.com (as of 11/30/2022)

Sector Weights

The sector weights of each fund are nearly identical, with many sector weights within .10% of each other!

ITOTFSKAX
Basic Materials2.74%2.66%
Consumer Cyclical10.21%10.43%
Financial Services14.25%14.04%
Real Estate3.58%3.46%
Communication Services6.93%6.91%
Energy5.04%5.13%
Industrials9.86%9.58%
Technology23.57%23.18%
Consumer Defensive6.77%6.77%
Healthcare15.07%14.97%
Utilities3.00%2.87%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar.com (as of 1/6/23 for ITOT and 11/30/2022 for FSKAX)

Factors to Consider

Expenses

Some investors may point out that the expense ratios between FSKAX and ITOT differ. This is true, but it is also reflected in the net performance chart above. At a certain level, differences in expense ratios do not matter. A small absolute difference (in basis points) is essentially meaningless (even if it appears large on a percentage basis). Since these portfolios are essentially identical, I would most likely lean towards ITOT.

Transaction Costs

ETFs are free to trade at many brokers and custodians, although many still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. To my knowledge, Fidelity does not participate in the pay-to-play arrangements that would allow their mutual funds to trade for free on many platforms. So if an investor account is at Fidelity, it is free to trade FSKAX or ITOT. However, only ITOT is free to trade in non-Fidelity accounts.

There is a bid-ask spread when trading ETFs, but this spread is typically less than .01% for ITOT and individual investor trades will not generally be large enough to “move” the market. In the case of ITOT, individual investors should not have a problem trading.

Tax Efficiency & Capital Gain Distributions

ETFs are typically more tax-efficient than mutual funds, due to their ability to avoid realizing capital gains through like-kind redemptions (a process that is beyond the scope of this post).

FSKAX routinely makes capital gains distributions, while ITOT does not make capital gains distributions nor do I expect it to (since it is an ETF). FSKAX is relatively tax-efficient since it is an index fund, but ITOT is even more tax-efficient.

Tax Loss Harvesting

My personal preference is to keep a portfolio entirely mutual funds or entirely ETFs, due to the mechanics of settlement during tax loss harvesting. If an ETF has declined in value and an investor sells it, the trade and cash proceeds will not settle for two business days (T+2). That investor may want to “replace” the sold ETF immediately and attempt to buy another ETF or mutual fund simultaneously.

However, mutual funds settle on T+1 basis, so cash for the mutual purchase would be due in one business day (which is one day earlier than the cash from the ETF sale is received). This can obviously cause problems and (even though this issue can be addressed with careful planning) I find it easier to keep accounts invested in similar vehicles. In this case, if a portfolio is all mutual funds, I might lean more towards FSKAX. If all ETFs, I might lean more towards ITOT.

Final Thoughts on FSKAX & ITOT

Except for the fact that FSKAX is a mutual fund and ITOT and ETF, these two funds are nearly identical. Personally, I would not spend too much time trying to divine which is “better” and would just choose whichever makes more sense for my portfolio based on the above factors.

FSKAX vs VTSAX

The Fidelity Total Stock Market Index fund (FSKAX) and the Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund (VTSAX) are two of the largest “total market” index funds in existence and easily two of the most popular among individual investors. VTSAX and FSKAX are the core of many investor portfolios and many investors compare FSKAX vs VTSAX in order to decide which should be the foundation of their portfolio.

A quick reminder that this site does NOT provide investment recommendations. Fund comparisons (such as this one) are not conducted to identify the “best” fund (since that will vary from investor to investor based on investor-specific factors). Rather, these fund comparison posts are designed to identify and distinguish between the fund details that matter versus the ones that don’t.

The Short Answer

There are very few differences between the two funds. The underlying benchmark indices that these funds track are technically different (CRSP US Total Market vs Dow Jones US Total Market), but they are identical is most respects. Consequently, the risk and return of FSKAX vs VTSAX funds is nearly identical and I consider these two funds equivalent and interchangeable.

The Longer Answer

These two funds are incredibly similar and leads some to question: are VTSAX and FSKAX the same?

Technically, VTSAX and FSKAX are different funds. But for many intents and purposes, VTSAX and FSKAX are identical. Both funds are broad-based indices that represent the US equity markets.

Historical Performance: FSKAX vs VTSAX

VTSAX was launched in 2001, while FSKAX was launched on September 7, 2011 (although other share classes of the Fidelity fund existed prior to this date). Since that time, the two funds have had identical performance: 12.65% vs 12.68% on an annualized basis. Over those 11 years, the cumulative performance differential has only been 1%!

Differences Between FSKAX and VTSAX

Geography

Both the VTSAX and FSKAX only include stocks of US-domiciled companies.

Market Capitalization

The two funds have a similar number of holdings (as of 11/30/2022); VTSAX holds 4,026 stocks versus FSKAX’s 3,989 stocks. Perhaps not surprisingly, the market cap weighting of the funds are identical.

VTSAXFSKAX
Large Cap73%73%
Mid Cap19%19%
Small Cap9%9%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar.com (as of 11/30/2022)

Sector Weights

The sector weights of each fund are nearly identical, with many sector weights within .05% of each other!

VTSAXFSKAX
Basic Materials2.65%2.66%
Consumer Cyclical10.35%10.43%
Financial Services13.90%14.04%
Real Estate3.48%3.46%
Communication Services6.89%6.91%
Energy5.09%5.13%
Industrials9.80%9.58%
Technology23.04%23.18%
Consumer Defensive6.80%6.77%
Healthcare15.09%14.97%
Utilities2.91%2.87%
Source: ThoughtfulFinance.com, Morningstar.com (as of 11/30/2022)

Factors to Consider

Expenses

Some investors may point out that the expense ratios between FSKAX and VTSAX differ. This is true, but it is also reflected in the net performance chart above. At a certain level, differences in expense ratios do not matter. A small absolute difference (in basis points) is essentially meaningless (even if it appears large on a percentage basis).

Transaction Costs

ETFs are free to trade at many brokers and custodians, although many still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. To my knowledge, neither Vanguard nor Fidelity participates in the pay-to-play arrangements that would allow their mutual funds to trade for free on many platforms. So if an investor account is at Fidelity, it is free to trade FSKAX; However, only accounts at Vanguard can trade VTSAX for free.

Investors looking for an ETF option (to reduce transaction costs) may consider VTI, the ETF equivalent of VTSAX (since Vanguard ETFs are a share class of their mutual funds). We recently reviewed FSKAX vs VTI.

Tax Efficiency & Capital Gain Distributions

FSKAX routinely makes capital gains distributions, while VTSAX has not made a capital gain distributions since 2000 (and I do not expect it to in the future due to the way that Vanguard structures its ETFs). ETFs are typically more tax-efficient than mutual funds, due to their ability to avoid realizing capital gains through like-kind redemptions (a process that is beyond the scope of this post). However, since Vanguard ETFs are a share class of their mutual funds, the mutual funds are able to benefit from this feature of the ETF. In other words, both VTSAX benefits from VTI’s tax-efficient mechanisms.

Thus, tax-sensitive investors may favor VTSAX or an ETF. FSKAX is relatively tax-efficient since it is an index fund, but VTSAX is even more tax-efficient.

Final Thoughts on FSKAX & VTSAX

Except for the fact these funds track different indices, FSKAX and VTSAX are nearly identical. Personally, I would not spend too much time trying to divine which is “better” and would just choose whichever makes more sense for my portfolio based on the above factors.

Scroll to Top