PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
MOAT vs. VONG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

MOAT vs. VONG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF (MOAT) and Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF (VONG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, MOAT achieves a -0.07% return, which is significantly lower than VONG's 7.40% return. Over the past 10 years, MOAT has underperformed VONG with an annualized return of 13.40%, while VONG has yielded a comparatively higher 18.60% annualized return.


MOAT

1D
0.88%
1M
3.57%
YTD
-0.07%
6M
-0.05%
1Y
15.51%
3Y*
11.79%
5Y*
8.20%
10Y*
13.40%

VONG

1D
0.21%
1M
5.36%
YTD
7.40%
6M
6.54%
1Y
25.53%
3Y*
25.06%
5Y*
15.42%
10Y*
18.60%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

MOAT vs. VONG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
MOAT
VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF
-0.07%13.20%10.73%31.89%-13.66%24.12%14.84%34.79%-1.28%23.18%
VONG
Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF
7.40%18.45%33.20%42.67%-29.18%27.60%38.30%36.06%-1.53%30.05%

Correlation

The correlation between MOAT and VONG is 0.56, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.56

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.60

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.76

Correlation (10Y)
Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.76

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 26, 2012

0.77

Over the past year, the correlation between MOAT and VONG has dropped to 0.56 - well below their long-term average of 0.77, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

MOAT vs. VONG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
MOAT
VONG

Technology

32.8%
51.4%

Consumer Defensive

17.5%
2.7%

Healthcare

16.0%
7.1%

Industrials

13.5%
5.7%

Consumer Cyclical

10.3%
13.2%

Financial Services

6.7%
5.3%

Communication Services

2.4%
13.2%

Real Estate

0.8%
0.4%

Basic Materials

-

0.3%

Energy

-

0.4%

Utilities

-

0.3%

Technology

MOAT
32.8%
VONG
51.4%

Consumer Defensive

MOAT
17.5%
VONG
2.7%

Healthcare

MOAT
16.0%
VONG
7.1%

Industrials

MOAT
13.5%
VONG
5.7%

Consumer Cyclical

MOAT
10.3%
VONG
13.2%

Financial Services

MOAT
6.7%
VONG
5.3%

Communication Services

MOAT
2.4%
VONG
13.2%

Real Estate

MOAT
0.8%
VONG
0.4%

Basic Materials

MOAT

-

VONG
0.3%

Energy

MOAT

-

VONG
0.4%

Utilities

MOAT

-

VONG
0.3%

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

MOAT vs. VONG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

MOAT
MOAT Risk / Return Rank: 3030
Overall Rank
MOAT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3232
Sharpe Ratio Rank
MOAT Sortino Ratio Rank: 3232
Sortino Ratio Rank
MOAT Omega Ratio Rank: 2929
Omega Ratio Rank
MOAT Calmar Ratio Rank: 2727
Calmar Ratio Rank
MOAT Martin Ratio Rank: 2828
Martin Ratio Rank

VONG
VONG Risk / Return Rank: 4242
Overall Rank
VONG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 4949
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VONG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
VONG Omega Ratio Rank: 4747
Omega Ratio Rank
VONG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3232
Calmar Ratio Rank
VONG Martin Ratio Rank: 3636
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

MOAT vs. VONG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF (MOAT) and Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF (VONG). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


MOATVONGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.54

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.58

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.19

1.29

-0.10

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

1.25

1.58

-0.33

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

3.90

5.29

-1.39

MOAT vs. VONG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current MOAT Sharpe Ratio is 1.12, which is lower than the VONG Sharpe Ratio of 1.67. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of MOAT and VONG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


MOATVONGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

1.12

1.67

-0.54

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.45

0.73

-0.27

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.72

0.89

-0.17

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.78

0.90

-0.12

Drawdowns

MOAT vs. VONG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum MOAT drawdown since its inception was -33.31%, roughly equal to the maximum VONG drawdown of -32.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for MOAT and VONG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


MOATVONGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-33.31%

-32.72%

-0.59%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-12.43%

-16.23%

+3.80%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-21.44%

-23.27%

+1.83%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-23.96%

-32.72%

+8.76%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-33.31%

-32.72%

-0.59%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-3.88%

-1.46%

-2.42%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-3.83%

-4.88%

+1.05%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.98%

4.84%

-0.86%

Volatility

MOAT vs. VONG - Volatility Comparison

VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF (MOAT) has a higher volatility of 3.86% compared to Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF (VONG) at 3.59%. This indicates that MOAT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VONG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


MOATVONGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

3.86%

3.59%

+0.27%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

9.88%

11.61%

-1.73%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

13.85%

15.36%

-1.51%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.18%

21.33%

-3.15%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

18.68%

20.87%

-2.19%

MOAT vs. VONG - Expense Ratio Comparison

MOAT has a 0.47% expense ratio, which is higher than VONG's 0.06% expense ratio.


Dividends

MOAT vs. VONG - Dividend Comparison

MOAT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.36%, more than VONG's 0.43% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
MOAT
VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF
1.36%1.36%1.37%0.86%1.25%1.08%1.46%1.31%1.79%1.07%1.17%2.13%
VONG
Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF
0.43%0.45%0.55%0.71%0.98%0.58%0.77%1.03%1.18%1.19%1.48%1.47%

Frequently Asked Questions


MOAT and VONG have a correlation of 0.56, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

MOAT has higher volatility (3.86%) compared to VONG (3.59%). In terms of maximum drawdown, MOAT dropped -33.31% vs VONG's -32.72%.

On 10-year performance, VONG leads with 18.60% vs 13.40% for MOAT. On fees, VONG is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, VONG has been the lower-risk option at 3.59%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, VONG has performed better with a 18.60% return vs 13.40%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VONG is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.47% for MOAT.

MOAT has the higher dividend yield at 1.36%, compared with 0.43% for VONG.

MOAT is categorized as Large Cap Blend Equities, while VONG is Large Cap Growth Equities. MOAT tracks Morningstar Wide Moat Focus Index, while VONG tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: VanEck and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.47% for MOAT and 0.06% for VONG.

VONG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.67 vs 1.12), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for MOAT and VONG

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer