The Vanguard International Dividend Appreciation Index Fund (Admiral Shares) (symbol VIAAX) and the Vanguard International Dividend Appreciation ETF (symbol VIGI) are two of the largest and most popular international dividend-oriented index funds. Some compare VIAAX vs VIGI not realizing that they are just two different share classes of the same 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

VIAAX and VIGI are different share classes of the same portfolio, which is made possible by Vanguard’s ETF share class structure. The decision to buy one or the other depends on investor-specific factors (some of which are listed below).

The Longer Answer

Vanguard ETFs are structured as share classes of their mutual funds. This is a patented structure that is scheduled to expire in 2023, so we may see this structure more frequently in the near future. In other words, VIAAX and VIGI are not two funds pursuing an identical strategy; they are the same fund!

Historical Performance: VIAAX vs VIGI

VIGI was launched on February 25, 2016, while VIAAX was launched on March 2, 2016. Since the common inception date (the latter of the two inception dates), performance has been close: 7.07% vs 7.22% annually. Despite changes in fees and expenses over this time period, there is only about a 1.5% difference in cumulative performance since inception! Looking at the chart of VIAAX vs VIGI below, it is obvious that they are identical.

Differences Between VIAAX and VIGI

Since the two funds are actually two share classes of the same fund, I will skip the usual comparisons here. The geographic exposures, sector weights, market cap coverage so on is identical because the two funds are shares in the same portfolio. There are some resources on the internet indicating otherwise, but these are incorrect.

Some investors may point out that the expense ratios between Vanguard’s Admiral Shares and Vanguard’s ETFs differ. This is true, but it is also reflected in the net performance chart above. At a certain level, differences in expense ration do not matter. A small absolute difference (in basis points) is essentially meaningless (even if it appears large on a percentage basis) and is often smaller than the bid-ask spread (see transaction costs below). Expenses do matter, but I would not sweat infinitesimally small differences (and they’ll show up in net performance anyways).

Factors to Consider

Transaction Costs

ETFs are free to trade at many brokers and custodians, including Vanguard. However, many brokers and custodians still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. 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 if an investor account is at Vanguard, it is free to trade VIAAX or VIGI. However, only VIGI is free to trade in non-Vanguard accounts.

Unfortunately, Vanguard does charge a .25% fee on both purchases and redemptions of VIAAX, no matter where the account is held. So investors should consider whether their allocation will be a one-time purchase or averaged in over time, as that may help them determined whether the mutual fund or ETF is a better choice.

There is a bid-ask spread when trading ETFs, but this spread is typically less than .05% for VIGI and individual investor trades will not generally be large enough to “move” the market. In the case of VIGI, 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). 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, VIGI is able to extend its tax benefits to VIAAX. A more in-depth explanation of Vanguard mutual fund tax-efficiency can be found here.

Both VIGI and VIAAX made their first-ever capital gains distributions in 2021. Its not clear whether the funds will make additional ones, but it is possible. The important thing to note is that each fund should be identical in terms of capital gains distributions. I noticed some posts on the internet saying that VIGI is more tax-efficient than VIAAX, but this incorrect as both funds have made equivalent (on a percentage basis) capital gains distributions recently.

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 VIAAX. If all ETFs, I might lean more towards VIGI.

On this topic, investors should probably avoid using these two funds as tax loss harvesting substitutes for one another since they would likely be considered “substantially identical.”

Tradability

VIAAX does have a stated minimum initial purchase of $3,000, so that may be a factor for some investors looking to initiate a position. The minimum purchase size for VIGI is typically one share, although fractional shares are becoming more common.

Investors can trade ETFs intraday, as well as in the pre-market and after-hours trading sessions. Investors can only buy/sell mutual funds once per day. This is not necessarily a major factor for long-term investors however.

Final Thoughts: VIAAX vs VIGI

VIAAX and VIGI are literally the same. However, investors should consider the above factors when deciding which one is best for them.

The Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US Small-Cap Index Fund (Admiral Shares) (symbol VFSAX) and the Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US Small-Cap ETF (symbol VSS) are two of the largest and most popular International small-cap index funds. Some compare VFSAX vs VSS not realizing that they are just two different share classes of the same 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

VFSAX and VSS are different share classes of the same portfolio, which is made possible by Vanguard’s ETF share class structure. The decision to buy one or the other depends on investor-specific factors (some of which are listed below).

The Longer Answer

Vanguard ETFs are structured as share classes of their mutual funds. This is a patented structure that is scheduled to expire in 2023, so we may see this structure more frequently in the near future. In other words, VFSAX and VSS are not two funds pursuing an identical strategy; they are the same fund!

Historical Performance: VFSAX vs VSS

VSS was launched on April 2, 2009, while VFSAX was launched on April 7, 2019. Since the common inception date (the latter of the two inception dates), performance has been very close: 3.19% vs 3.11% annually. Despite changes in fees and expenses over this time period, there is only about a .35% difference in cumulative performance since inception! Looking at the chart of VFSAX vs VSS below, it is obvious that they are nearly identical.

Differences Between VFSAX and VSS

Since the two funds are actually two share classes of the same fund, I will skip the usual comparisons here. The geographic exposures, sector weights, market cap coverage so on is identical because the two funds are shares in the same portfolio. There are some resources on the internet indicating otherwise, but these are incorrect.

Some investors may point out that the expense ratios between Vanguard’s Admiral Shares and Vanguard’s ETFs differ. This is true, but it is also reflected in the net performance chart above. At a certain level, differences in expense ration do not matter. A small absolute difference (in basis points) is essentially meaningless (even if it appears large on a percentage basis) and is often smaller than the bid-ask spread (see transaction costs below). Expenses do matter, but I would not sweat infinitesimally small differences (and they’ll show up in net performance anyways).

Factors to Consider

Transaction Costs

ETFs are free to trade at many brokers and custodians, including Vanguard. However, many brokers and custodians still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. 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 if an investor account is at Vanguard, it is free to trade VFSAX or VSS. However, only VSS is free to trade in non-Vanguard accounts.

There is a bid-ask spread when trading ETFs, but this spread is typically less than .01% for VSS and individual investor trades will not generally be large enough to “move” the market. In the case of VSS, 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). 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, VSS is able to extend its tax benefits to VFSAX. A more in-depth explanation of Vanguard mutual fund tax-efficiency can be found here.

VFSAX has never paid a capital gain distribution! I noticed some posts on the internet saying that VSS is more tax-efficient than VFSAX, but this incorrect as neither fund has ever made a capital gains distribution.

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 VFSAX. If all ETFs, I might lean more towards VSS.

On this topic, investors should probably avoid using these two funds as tax loss harvesting substitutes for one another since they would likely be considered “substantially identical.”

Tradability

VFSAX does have a stated minimum initial purchase of $3,000, so that may be a factor for some investors looking to initiate a position. The minimum purchase size for VSS is typically one share, although fractional shares are becoming more common.

Investors can trade ETFs intraday, as well as in the pre-market and after-hours trading sessions. Investors can only buy/sell mutual funds once per day. This is not necessarily a major factor for long-term investors however.

Final Thoughts: VFSAX vs VSS

VFSAX and VSS are literally the same. However, investors should consider the above factors when deciding which one is best for them.

The Vanguard Global ex-US Real Estate Index Fund (Admiral Shares) (symbol VGRLX) and the Vanguard Global ex-US Real Estate ETF (symbol VNQI) are two of the largest and most popular international real estate sector index funds. Some compare VGRLX vs VNQI not realizing that they are just two different share classes of the same 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

VGRLX and VNQI are different share classes of the same portfolio, which is made possible by Vanguard’s ETF share class structure. The decision to buy one or the other depends on investor-specific factors (some of which are listed below).

The Longer Answer

Vanguard ETFs are structured as share classes of their mutual funds. This is a patented structure that is scheduled to expire in 2023, so we may see this structure more frequently in the near future. In other words, VGRLX and VNQI are not two funds pursuing an identical strategy; they are the same fund!

Historical Performance: VGRLX vs VNQI

VNQI was launched on November 1, 2010, while VGRLX was launched on February 10, 2011. Since the common inception date (the latter of the two inception dates), performance has been very similar: 2.50% vs 2.63% annually. Despite changes in fees and expenses over this time period, there is only a two percent difference in cumulative performance since inception! Looking at the chart of VGRLX vs VNQI below, it is obvious that they are identical.

Differences Between VGRLX and VNQI

Since the two funds are actually two share classes of the same fund, I will skip the usual comparisons here. The geographic exposures, sector weights, market cap coverage so on is identical because the two funds are shares in the same portfolio. There are some resources on the internet indicating otherwise, but these are incorrect.

Some investors may point out that the expense ratios between Vanguard’s Admiral Shares and Vanguard’s ETFs differ. This is true, but it is also reflected in the net performance chart above. At a certain level, differences in expense ration do not matter. A small absolute difference (in basis points) is essentially meaningless (even if it appears large on a percentage basis) and is often smaller than the bid-ask spread (see transaction costs below). Expenses do matter, but I would not sweat infinitesimally small differences (and they’ll show up in net performance anyways).

Factors to Consider

Transaction Costs

ETFs are free to trade at many brokers and custodians, including Vanguard. However, many brokers and custodians still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. 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 if an investor account is at Vanguard, it is free to trade VGRLX or VNQI. However, only VNQI is free to trade in non-Vanguard accounts.

Unfortunately, Vanguard does charge a .25% fee on both purchases and redemptions of VGRLX, no matter where the account is held. So investors should consider whether their allocation will be a one-time purchase or averaged in over time, as that may help them determined whether the mutual fund or ETF is a better choice.

There is a bid-ask spread when trading ETFs, but this spread is typically less than .16% for VNQI and individual investor trades will not generally be large enough to “move” the market. In the case of VNQI, 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). 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, VNQI is able to extend its tax benefits to VGRLX. A more in-depth explanation of Vanguard mutual fund tax-efficiency can be found here.

VGRLX has never paid a capital gain distribution! I noticed some posts on the internet saying that VNQI is more tax-efficient than VGRLX, but this incorrect as neither fund has ever made a capital gains distribution.

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 VGRLX. If all ETFs, I might lean more towards VNQI.

On this topic, investors should probably avoid using these two funds as tax loss harvesting substitutes for one another since they would likely be considered “substantially identical.”

Tradability

VGRLX does have a stated minimum initial purchase of $3,000, so that may be a factor for some investors looking to initiate a position. The minimum purchase size for VNQI is typically one share, although fractional shares are becoming more common.

Investors can trade ETFs intraday, as well as in the pre-market and after-hours trading sessions. Investors can only buy/sell mutual funds once per day. This is not necessarily a major factor for long-term investors however.

Final Thoughts: VGRLX vs VNQI

VGRLX and VNQI are literally the same. However, investors should consider the above factors when deciding which one is best for them.

The Vanguard Financials Index Fund (Admiral Shares) (symbol VFAIX) and the Vanguard Financials ETF (symbol VFH) are two of the largest and most popular financial sector index funds. Some compare VFAIX vs VFH not realizing that they are just two different share classes of the same 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

VFAIX and VFH are different share classes of the same portfolio, which is made possible by Vanguard’s ETF share class structure. The decision to buy one or the other depends on investor-specific factors (some of which are listed below).

The Longer Answer

Vanguard ETFs are structured as share classes of their mutual funds. This is a patented structure that is scheduled to expire in 2023, so we may see this structure more frequently in the near future. In other words, VFAIX and VFH are not two funds pursuing an identical strategy; they are the same fund!

Historical Performance: VFAIX vs VFH

VFH was launched on January 26, 2004, while VFAIX was launched on February 4, 2004. Since the common inception date (the latter of the two inception dates), performance has been identical; both funds have returned 4.94% annually! Despite changes in fees and expenses over this time period, there is less than a .1% percent difference in cumulative performance since inception! Looking at the chart of VFAIX vs VFH below, it is obvious that they are identical.

Differences Between VFAIX and VFH

Since the two funds are actually two share classes of the same fund, I will skip the usual comparisons here. The geographic exposures, sector weights, market cap coverage so on is identical because the two funds are shares in the same portfolio. There are some resources on the internet indicating otherwise, but these are incorrect.

Some investors may point out that the expense ratios between Vanguard’s Admiral Shares and Vanguard’s ETFs differ. This is true, but it is also reflected in the net performance chart above. At a certain level, differences in expense ration do not matter. A small absolute difference (in basis points) is essentially meaningless (even if it appears large on a percentage basis) and is often smaller than the bid-ask spread (see transaction costs below). Expenses do matter, but I would not sweat infinitesimally small differences (and they’ll show up in net performance anyways).

Factors to Consider

Transaction Costs

ETFs are free to trade at many brokers and custodians, including Vanguard. However, many brokers and custodians still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. 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 if an investor account is at Vanguard, it is free to trade VFAIX or VFH. However, only VFH is free to trade in non-Vanguard accounts.

There is a bid-ask spread when trading ETFs, but this spread is typically less than .03% for VFH and individual investor trades will not generally be large enough to “move” the market. In the case of VFH, 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). 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, VFH is able to extend its tax benefits to VFAIX. A more in-depth explanation of Vanguard mutual fund tax-efficiency can be found here.

VFAIX has never paid a capital gain distribution! I noticed some posts on the internet saying that VFH is more tax-efficient than VFAIX, but this incorrect as neither fund has ever made a capital gains distribution.

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 VFAIX. If all ETFs, I might lean more towards VFH.

On this topic, investors should probably avoid using these two funds as tax loss harvesting substitutes for one another since they would likely be considered “substantially identical.”

Tradability

VFAIX does have a stated minimum initial purchase of $100,000, so that may be a factor for some investors looking to initiate a position. The minimum purchase size for VFH is typically one share, although fractional shares are becoming more common.

Investors can trade ETFs intraday, as well as in the pre-market and after-hours trading sessions. Investors can only buy/sell mutual funds once per day. This is not necessarily a major factor for long-term investors however.

Final Thoughts: VFAIX vs VFH

VFAIX and VFH are literally the same. However, investors should consider the above factors when deciding which one is best for them.

Investors looking for non-Vanguard financials ETFs should read my comparisons of VFH vs FNCL (Fidelity’s financials ETF) or VFH vs XLF (State Street’s financials ETF).

The Vanguard Energy Index Fund (Admiral Shares) (symbol VENAX) and the Vanguard Energy ETF (symbol VDE) are two of the largest and most popular energy sector index funds. Some compare VENAX vs VDE not realizing that they are just two different share classes of the same 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

VENAX and VDE are different share classes of the same portfolio, which is made possible by Vanguard’s ETF share class structure. The decision to buy one or the other depends on investor-specific factors (some of which are listed below).

The Longer Answer

Vanguard ETFs are structured as share classes of their mutual funds. This is a patented structure that is scheduled to expire in 2023, so we may see this structure more frequently in the near future. In other words, VENAX and VDE are not two funds pursuing an identical strategy; they are the same fund!

Historical Performance: VENAX vs VDE

VDE was launched on September 23, 2004, while VENAX was launched on October 7, 2004. Since the common inception date (the latter of the two inception dates), performance has been identical: 7.49% vs 7.48% annually. Despite changes in fees and expenses over this time period, there is only about a half percent difference in cumulative performance since inception! Looking at the chart of VENAX vs VDE below, it is obvious that they are identical.

Differences Between VENAX and VDE

Since the two funds are actually two share classes of the same fund, I will skip the usual comparisons here. The geographic exposures, sector weights, market cap coverage so on is identical because the two funds are shares in the same portfolio. There are some resources on the internet indicating otherwise, but these are incorrect.

Some investors may point out that the expense ratios between Vanguard’s Admiral Shares and Vanguard’s ETFs differ. This is true, but it is also reflected in the net performance chart above. At a certain level, differences in expense ration do not matter. A small absolute difference (in basis points) is essentially meaningless (even if it appears large on a percentage basis) and is often smaller than the bid-ask spread (see transaction costs below). Expenses do matter, but I would not sweat infinitesimally small differences (and they’ll show up in net performance anyways).

Factors to Consider

Transaction Costs

ETFs are free to trade at many brokers and custodians, including Vanguard. However, many brokers and custodians still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. 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 if an investor account is at Vanguard, it is free to trade VENAX or VDE. However, only VDE is free to trade in non-Vanguard accounts.

There is a bid-ask spread when trading ETFs, but this spread is typically less than .02% for VDE and individual investor trades will not generally be large enough to “move” the market. In the case of VDE, 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). 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, VDE is able to extend its tax benefits to VENAX. A more in-depth explanation of Vanguard mutual fund tax-efficiency can be found here.

VENAX has never paid a capital gain distribution! I noticed some posts on the internet saying that VDE is more tax-efficient than VENAX, but this incorrect as neither fund has ever made a capital gains distribution.

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 VENAX. If all ETFs, I might lean more towards VDE.

On this topic, investors should probably avoid using these two funds as tax loss harvesting substitutes for one another since they would likely be considered “substantially identical.”

Tradability

VENAX does have a stated minimum initial purchase of $100,000, so that may be a factor for some investors looking to initiate a position. The minimum purchase size for VDE is typically one share, although fractional shares are becoming more common.

Investors can trade ETFs intraday, as well as in the pre-market and after-hours trading sessions. Investors can only buy/sell mutual funds once per day. This is not necessarily a major factor for long-term investors however.

Final Thoughts: VENAX vs VDE

VENAX and VDE are literally the same. However, investors should consider the above factors when deciding which one is best for them.

Investors curious about non-Vanguard energy ETFs should read my posts comparing VDE vs XLE (State Street’s energy ETF) or VDE vs FENY (Fidelity’s energy ETF).

The Vanguard Consumer Staples Index Fund (Admiral Shares) (symbol VCSAX) and the Vanguard Consumer Staples ETF (symbol VDC) are two of the largest and most popular consumer staples sector index funds. Some compare VCSAX vs VDC not realizing that they are just two different share classes of the same 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

VCSAX and VDC are different share classes of the same portfolio, which is made possible by Vanguard’s ETF share class structure. The decision to buy one or the other depends on investor-specific factors (some of which are listed below).

The Longer Answer

Vanguard ETFs are structured as share classes of their mutual funds. This is a patented structure that is scheduled to expire in 2023, so we may see this structure more frequently in the near future. In other words, VCSAX and VDC are not two funds pursuing an identical strategy; they are the same fund!

Historical Performance: VCSAX vs VDC

VDC was launched on January 26, 2004, while VCSAX was launched on January 30, 2004. Since the common inception date (the latter of the two inception dates), performance has been identical; both funds have returned 9.75% annually! Despite changes in fees and expenses over this time period, there is only about a quarter percent difference in cumulative performance since inception! Looking at the chart of VCSAX vs VDC below, it is obvious that they are identical.

Differences Between VCSAX and VDC

Since the two funds are actually two share classes of the same fund, I will skip the usual comparisons here. The geographic exposures, sector weights, market cap coverage so on is identical because the two funds are shares in the same portfolio. There are some resources on the internet indicating otherwise, but these are incorrect.

Some investors may point out that the expense ratios between Vanguard’s Admiral Shares and Vanguard’s ETFs differ. This is true, but it is also reflected in the net performance chart above. At a certain level, differences in expense ration do not matter. A small absolute difference (in basis points) is essentially meaningless (even if it appears large on a percentage basis) and is often smaller than the bid-ask spread (see transaction costs below). Expenses do matter, but I would not sweat infinitesimally small differences (and they’ll show up in net performance anyways).

Factors to Consider

Transaction Costs

ETFs are free to trade at many brokers and custodians, including Vanguard. However, many brokers and custodians still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. 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 if an investor account is at Vanguard, it is free to trade VCSAX or VDC. However, only VDC is free to trade in non-Vanguard accounts.

There is a bid-ask spread when trading ETFs, but this spread is typically less than .03% for VDC and individual investor trades will not generally be large enough to “move” the market. In the case of VDC, 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). 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, VDC is able to extend its tax benefits to VCSAX. A more in-depth explanation of Vanguard mutual fund tax-efficiency can be found here.

Neither VDC nor VCSAX has made a capital gain distribution since 2004, the year of both their inceptions. I noticed some posts on the internet saying that VDC is more tax-efficient than VCSAX, but this incorrect as neither fund has made a capital gains distribution for nearly two decades.

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 VCSAX. If all ETFs, I might lean more towards VDC.

On this topic, investors should probably avoid using these two funds as tax loss harvesting substitutes for one another since they would likely be considered “substantially identical.”

Tradability

VCSAX does have a stated minimum initial purchase of $100,000, so that may be a factor for some investors looking to initiate a position. The minimum purchase size for VDC is typically one share, although fractional shares are becoming more common.

Investors can trade ETFs intraday, as well as in the pre-market and after-hours trading sessions. Investors can only buy/sell mutual funds once per day. This is not necessarily a major factor for long-term investors however.

Final Thoughts: VCSAX vs VDC

VCSAX and VDC are literally the same. However, investors should consider the above factors when deciding which one is best for them.

Investors interested in non-Vanguard consumer staples ETFs should read my comparisons of VDC vs XLP or VDC vs FSTA.

The Vanguard Extended Market Index Fund (Admiral Shares) (symbol VEXAX) and the Vanguard Extended Market ETF (symbol VXF) are two of the largest and most US-focused index funds. Some compare VEXAX vs VXF not realizing that they are just two different share classes of the same 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

VEXAX and VXF are different share classes of the same portfolio, which is made possible by Vanguard’s ETF share class structure. The decision to buy one or the other depends on investor-specific factors (some of which are listed below).

The Longer Answer

Vanguard ETFs are structured as share classes of their mutual funds. This is a patented structure that is scheduled to expire in 2023, so we may see this structure more frequently in the near future. In other words, VEXAX and VXF are not two funds pursuing an identical strategy; they are the same fund!

Historical Performance: VEXAX vs VXF

VEXAX was launched on November 13, 2000, while VXF was launched a year later on December 27, 2001. Since that time, performance has been nearly identical to VEXAX: 8.53% vs 8.55% annually. Despite changes in fees and expenses over this time period, there is less than a 2.5 percent difference in cumulative performance since inception! Looking at the chart of VEXAX vs VXF below, it is obvious that they are identical.

Differences Between VEXAX and VXF

Since the two funds are actually two share classes of the same fund, I will skip the usual comparisons here. The geographic exposures, sector weights, market cap coverage so on is identical because the two funds are shares in the same portfolio. There are some resources on the internet indicating otherwise, but these are incorrect.

Some investors may point out that the expense ratios between Vanguard’s Admiral Shares and Vanguard’s ETFs differ. This is true, but it is also reflected in the net performance chart above. At a certain level, differences in expense ration do not matter. A small absolute difference (in basis points) is essentially meaningless (even if it appears large on a percentage basis) and is often smaller than the bid-ask spread (see transaction costs below). Expenses do matter, but I would not sweat infinitesimally small differences (and they’ll show up in net performance anyways).

Factors to Consider

Transaction Costs

ETFs are free to trade at many brokers and custodians, including Vanguard. However, many brokers and custodians still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. 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 if an investor account is at Vanguard, it is free to trade VEXAX or VXF. However, only VXF is free to trade in non-Vanguard accounts.

There is a bid-ask spread when trading ETFs, but this spread is typically less than .02% for VXF and individual investor trades will not generally be large enough to “move” the market. In the case of VXF, 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). 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, VXF is able to extend its tax benefits to VEXAX. A more in-depth explanation of Vanguard mutual fund tax-efficiency can be found here.

VEXAX has not made a capital gain distribution since 2001! I noticed some posts on the internet saying that VXF is more tax-efficient than VEXAX, but this incorrect as neither VXF nor VEXAX has made capital gains distributions since the launch of VXF.

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 VEXAX. If all ETFs, I might lean more towards VXF.

On this topic, investors should probably avoid using these two funds as tax loss harvesting substitutes for one another since they would likely be considered “substantially identical.”

Tradability

VEXAX does have a stated minimum initial purchase of $3,000, so that may be a factor for some investors looking to initiate a position. The minimum purchase size for VXF is typically one share, although fractional shares are becoming more common.

Investors can trade ETFs intraday, as well as in the pre-market and after-hours trading sessions. Investors can only buy/sell mutual funds once per day. This is not necessarily a major factor for long-term investors however.

Final Thoughts: VEXAX vs VXF

VEXAX and VXF are literally the same. However, investors should consider the above factors when deciding which one is best for them.

The Vanguard Mortgage-Backed Securities Index Fund (Admiral Shares) (symbol VMBSX) and the Vanguard Mortgage-Backed Securities ETF (symbol VMBS) are two of the largest and most popular mortgage-backed securities (MBS) index funds. Some compare VMBSX vs VMBS not realizing that they are just two different share classes of the same 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

VMBSX and VMBS are different share classes of the same portfolio. The decision to buy one or the other depends on investor-specific factors (some of which are listed below).

The Longer Answer

Vanguard ETFs are structured as share classes of their mutual funds. This is a patented structure that is scheduled to expire in 2023, so we may see this structure more frequently in the near future. In other words, VMBSX and VMBS are not two funds pursuing an identical strategy; they are the same fund! Read more about Vanguard’s share class structure and the potential benefits.

Historical Performance: VMBSX vs VMBS

Both VMBS and VMBSX were launched in late 2009. Perhaps not surprisingly, performance has been nearly identical since their common inception: 1.42% vs 1.45% annually. Despite changes in fees and expenses over that time period, the cumulative difference in performance over that time period is less than a half percent! Looking at the chart of VMBSX vs VMBS below, it is obvious that they are identical.

Risks of Fixed-Income ETFs

One of the risks of fixed-income ETFs is that they trade well below their net asset value (NAV) in times of distress. This is clear if we chart VMBSX vs VMBS during the first half of 2020. VMBS declined over 5% (peak-to-trough), while VMBSX “only” declined 2%+. Remember, these are simply different share classes of the exact same fund! However, VMBS trades at a market price and VMBSX is traded at a NAV.

This is caused by the fact that fixed-income typically trades at wide bid-ask spreads, which widen even further during market volatility. Sometimes the bids will disappear altogether. Mutual funds generally publish a NAV based on market prices (or estimated values for fixed-income), so estimating a NAV is difficult if the market freezes or bids disappear.

The consensus is that ETFs provide better “price discovery” than mutual funds, since ETFs represent actual market prices. In this example, it is widely assumed that the VMBS value was closer to value of the underlying portfolio than the VMBSX NAV. Interestingly, holders of VMBSX could have sold their holdings and rotated into VMBS (which is the exact same portfolio) at a substantial discount.

Differences Between VMBSX and VMBS

Since the two funds are actually two share classes of the same fund, I will skip the usual comparisons here. The geographic exposures, sector weights, market cap coverage so on is identical because the two funds are shares in the same portfolio. There are some resources on the internet indicating otherwise, but these are incorrect.

Factors to Consider

Transaction Costs

ETFs are free to trade at many brokers and custodians, including Vanguard. However, many brokers and custodians still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. 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 if an investor account is at Vanguard, it is free to trade VMBSX or VMBS. However, only VMBS is free to trade in non-Vanguard accounts.

There is a bid-ask spread when trading ETFs, but this spread is typically less than .02% for VMBS and individual investor trades will not generally be large enough to “move” the market. In the case of VMBS, 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). 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, VMBS is able to extend its tax benefits to VMBSX.

One additional consideration is that fixed-income ETFs are not quite as tax-efficient as equity ETFs. Both VMBSX and VMBS have made a capital gains distributions in the past. I noticed some posts on the internet saying that VMBS is more tax-efficient than VMBSX, but this incorrect.

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 VMBSX. If all ETFs, I might lean more towards VMBS.

On this topic, investors should probably avoid using these two funds as tax loss harvesting substitutes for one another since they would likely be considered “substantially identical.”

Tradability

VMBSX does have a stated minimum initial purchase of $3,000, so that may be a factor for some investors looking to initiate a position. The minimum purchase size for VMBS is typically one share, although fractional shares are becoming more common.

Investors can trade ETFs intraday, as well as in the pre-market and after-hours trading sessions. Investors can only buy/sell mutual funds once per day. This is not necessarily a major factor for long-term investors however.

Final Thoughts: VMBSX vs VMBS

VMBSX and VMBS are literally the same portfolio. However, I personally shy away from fixed-income ETFs due to their tendency to trade below NAV during episodes of extreme volatility. If two options provide the same risk and return, but one does not have periodic blowups then I’ll go with that one. Of course, there are other factors to consider (such as the above).

The Vanguard Materials Index Fund (Admiral Shares) (symbol VMIAX) and the Vanguard Materials ETF (symbol VAW) are two of the largest and most popular materials sector index funds. Some compare VMIAX vs VAW not realizing that they are just two different share classes of the same 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

VMIAX and VAW are different share classes of the same portfolio, which is made possible by Vanguard’s ETF share class structure. The decision to buy one or the other depends on investor-specific factors (some of which are listed below).

The Longer Answer

Vanguard ETFs are structured as share classes of their mutual funds. This is a patented structure that is scheduled to expire in 2023, so we may see this structure more frequently in the near future. In other words, VMIAX and VAW are not two funds pursuing an identical strategy; they are the same fund!

Historical Performance: VMIAX vs VAW

VAW was launched on January 26, 2004, while VMIAX was launched on February 11, 2004. Since the common inception date (the latter of the two inception dates), performance has been identical; both funds have returned 8.62% annually. Despite changes in fees and expenses over this time period, there is only about a half percent difference in cumulative performance since inception! Looking at the chart of VMIAX vs VAW below, it is obvious that they are identical.

Differences Between VMIAX and VAW

Since the two funds are actually two share classes of the same fund, I will skip the usual comparisons here. The geographic exposures, sector weights, market cap coverage so on is identical because the two funds are shares in the same portfolio. There are some resources on the internet indicating otherwise, but these are incorrect.

Some investors may point out that the expense ratios between Vanguard’s Admiral Shares and Vanguard’s ETFs differ. This is true, but it is also reflected in the net performance chart above. At a certain level, differences in expense ration do not matter. A small absolute difference (in basis points) is essentially meaningless (even if it appears large on a percentage basis) and is often smaller than the bid-ask spread (see transaction costs below). Expenses do matter, but I would not sweat infinitesimally small differences (and they’ll show up in net performance anyways).

Factors to Consider

Transaction Costs

ETFs are free to trade at many brokers and custodians, including Vanguard. However, many brokers and custodians still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. 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 if an investor account is at Vanguard, it is free to trade VMIAX or VAW. However, only VAW is free to trade in non-Vanguard accounts.

There is a bid-ask spread when trading ETFs, but this spread is typically less than .05% for VAW and individual investor trades will not generally be large enough to “move” the market. In the case of VAW, 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). 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, VAW is able to extend its tax benefits to VMIAX. A more in-depth explanation of Vanguard mutual fund tax-efficiency can be found here.

VMIAX has never paid a capital gain distribution! I noticed some posts on the internet saying that VAW is more tax-efficient than VMIAX, but this incorrect as neither fund has ever made a capital gains distribution.

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 VMIAX. If all ETFs, I might lean more towards VAW.

On this topic, investors should probably avoid using these two funds as tax loss harvesting substitutes for one another since they would likely be considered “substantially identical.”

Tradability

VMIAX does have a stated minimum initial purchase of $100,000, so that may be a factor for some investors looking to initiate a position. The minimum purchase size for VAW is typically one share, although fractional shares are becoming more common.

Investors can trade ETFs intraday, as well as in the pre-market and after-hours trading sessions. Investors can only buy/sell mutual funds once per day. This is not necessarily a major factor for long-term investors however.

Final Thoughts: VMIAX vs VAW

VMIAX and VAW are literally the same. However, investors should consider the above factors when deciding which one is best for them.

The Vanguard International High Dividend Yield Index Fund (Admiral Shares) (symbol VIHAX) and the Vanguard International High Dividend Yield ETF (symbol VYMI) are two of the largest and most popular international dividend-oriented index funds. Some compare VIHAX vs VYMI not realizing that they are just two different share classes of the same 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

VIHAX and VYMI are different share classes of the same portfolio, which is made possible by Vanguard’s ETF share class structure. The decision to buy one or the other depends on investor-specific factors (some of which are listed below).

The Longer Answer

Vanguard ETFs are structured as share classes of their mutual funds. This is a patented structure that is scheduled to expire in 2023, so we may see this structure more frequently in the near future. In other words, VIHAX and VYMI are not two funds pursuing an identical strategy; they are the same fund!

Historical Performance: VIHAX vs VYMI

VYMI was launched on February 25, 2016, while VIHAX was launched on March 2, 2016. Since the common inception date (the latter of the two inception dates), performance has been very close: 6.15% vs 6.24% annually. Despite changes in fees and expenses over this time period, there is only about a one percent difference in cumulative performance since inception! Looking at the chart of VIHAX vs VYMI below, it is obvious that they are identical.

Differences Between VIHAX and VYMI

Since the two funds are actually two share classes of the same fund, I will skip the usual comparisons here. The geographic exposures, sector weights, market cap coverage so on is identical because the two funds are shares in the same portfolio. There are some resources on the internet indicating otherwise, but these are incorrect.

Some investors may point out that the expense ratios between Vanguard’s Admiral Shares and Vanguard’s ETFs differ. This is true, but it is also reflected in the net performance chart above. At a certain level, differences in expense ration do not matter. A small absolute difference (in basis points) is essentially meaningless (even if it appears large on a percentage basis) and is often smaller than the bid-ask spread (see transaction costs below). Expenses do matter, but I would not sweat infinitesimally small differences (and they’ll show up in net performance anyways).

Factors to Consider

Transaction Costs

ETFs are free to trade at many brokers and custodians, including Vanguard. However, many brokers and custodians still charge commissions and/or transaction fees to buy/sell mutual funds. 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 if an investor account is at Vanguard, it is free to trade VIHAX or VYMI. However, only VYMI is free to trade in non-Vanguard accounts.

Unfortunately, Vanguard does charge a .25% fee on both purchases and redemptions of VIHAX, no matter where the account is held. So investors should consider whether their allocation will be a one-time purchase or averaged in over time, as that may help them determined whether the mutual fund or ETF is a better choice.

There is a bid-ask spread when trading ETFs, but this spread is typically less than .04% for VYMI and individual investor trades will not generally be large enough to “move” the market. In the case of VYMI, 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). 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, VYMI is able to extend its tax benefits to VIHAX. A more in-depth explanation of Vanguard mutual fund tax-efficiency can be found here.

VIHAX has never paid a capital gain distribution! I noticed some posts on the internet saying that VYMI is more tax-efficient than VIHAX, but this incorrect as neither fund has ever made a capital gains distribution.

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 VIHAX. If all ETFs, I might lean more towards VYMI.

On this topic, investors should probably avoid using these two funds as tax loss harvesting substitutes for one another since they would likely be considered “substantially identical.”

Tradability

VIHAX does have a stated minimum initial purchase of $3,000, so that may be a factor for some investors looking to initiate a position. The minimum purchase size for VYMI is typically one share, although fractional shares are becoming more common.

Investors can trade ETFs intraday, as well as in the pre-market and after-hours trading sessions. Investors can only buy/sell mutual funds once per day. This is not necessarily a major factor for long-term investors however.

Final Thoughts: VIHAX vs VYMI

VIHAX and VYMI are literally the same. However, investors should consider the above factors when deciding which one is best for them.