VONG vs. TDVG

Last updated Jun 24, 2026

VONG (Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF) and TDVG (T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF) are both Large Cap Growth Equities funds. VONG is passively managed, while TDVG is actively managed. Over the past 5 years, VONG returned 13.07%/yr vs 10.19%/yr for TDVG. A 0.75 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined. VONG charges 0.06%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for TDVG.

Performance

VONG vs. TDVG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF (VONG) and T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF (TDVG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VONG achieves a 1.56% return, which is significantly lower than TDVG's 8.04% return.

VONG

• 1D: -1.57%
• 1M: -3.99%
• YTD: 1.56%
• 6M: 0.27%
• 1Y: 18.03%
• 3Y*: 21.88%
• 5Y*: 13.07%
• 10Y*: 18.39%

TDVG

• 1D: -0.55%
• 1M: 1.22%
• YTD: 8.04%
• 6M: 7.41%
• 1Y: 17.57%
• 3Y*: 15.55%
• 5Y*: 10.19%
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

VONG vs. TDVG - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020
VONG Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF	1.56%	18.45%	33.20%	42.67%	-29.18%	27.60%	15.25%
TDVG T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF	8.04%	14.80%	13.45%	13.95%	-10.15%	26.20%	12.97%

Correlation

The correlation between VONG and TDVG is 0.59, 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	0.59
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.66
Correlation (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	0.76
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Aug 5, 2020	0.75

The correlation between VONG and TDVG shifts across timeframes, from 0.59 (1 year) to 0.76 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

VONG vs. TDVG - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	VONG	TDVG
Technology	54.1%	26.2%
Consumer Cyclical	12.5%	7.2%
Communication Services	12.0%	1.0%
Healthcare	6.9%	12.4%
Industrials	4.9%	13.6%
Financial Services	4.8%	19.3%
Consumer Defensive	2.5%	6.9%
Utilities	1.0%	3.8%
Real Estate	0.4%	1.6%
Energy	0.4%	5.3%
Basic Materials	0.3%	2.8%

Return for Risk

VONG vs. TDVG — Risk / Return Rank

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

VONG

VONG Risk / Return Rank: 29
VONG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 32
VONG Sortino Ratio Rank: 30
VONG Omega Ratio Rank: 30
VONG Calmar Ratio Rank: 24
VONG Martin Ratio Rank: 27

TDVG

TDVG Risk / Return Rank: 56
TDVG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 56
TDVG Sortino Ratio Rank: 58
TDVG Omega Ratio Rank: 54
TDVG Calmar Ratio Rank: 52
TDVG Martin Ratio Rank: 59

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.

VONG vs. TDVG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF (VONG) and T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF (TDVG). 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.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	VONG	TDVG	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.12	1.81	-0.69
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	1.58	2.60	-1.02
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.20	1.32	-0.12
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.12	2.44	-1.32
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	3.64	10.01	-6.37

VONG vs. TDVG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VONG Sharpe Ratio is 1.12, which is lower than the TDVG Sharpe Ratio of 1.81. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VONG and TDVG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

VONG vs. TDVG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VONG drawdown since its inception was -32.72%, which is greater than TDVG's maximum drawdown of -19.20%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VONG and TDVG.

Drawdown Indicators

	VONG	TDVG	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-32.72%	-19.20%	-13.52%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-16.23%	-7.24%	-8.99%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-23.27%	-14.02%	-9.25%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-32.72%	-19.20%	-13.52%
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-32.72%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-6.82%	-0.82%	-6.00%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-4.88%	-3.73%	-1.15%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	4.97%	1.76%	+3.21%

Volatility

VONG vs. TDVG - Volatility Comparison

Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF (VONG) has a higher volatility of 6.04% compared to T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF (TDVG) at 2.78%. This indicates that VONG's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than TDVG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	VONG	TDVG	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	6.04%	2.78%	+3.26%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	12.59%	7.61%	+4.98%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	16.17%	9.79%	+6.38%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	21.45%	13.92%	+7.53%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	20.92%	13.90%	+7.02%

VONG vs. TDVG - Expense Ratio Comparison

VONG has a 0.06% expense ratio, which is lower than TDVG's 0.50% expense ratio.

Dividends

VONG vs. TDVG - Dividend Comparison

VONG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.47%, less than TDVG's 0.98% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
TDVG T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF	0.98%	1.00%	1.06%	1.31%	1.15%	0.80%	0.40%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
VONG Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF	0.47%	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

Can I hold both VONG and TDVG in my portfolio?

VONG and TDVG have a correlation of 0.59, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, VONG or TDVG?

VONG has higher volatility (6.04%) compared to TDVG (2.78%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VONG dropped -32.72% vs TDVG's -19.20%.

Which ETF is better, VONG or TDVG?

On 5-year performance, VONG leads with 13.07% vs 10.19% for TDVG. On fees, VONG is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, TDVG has been the lower-risk option at 2.78%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, VONG or TDVG?

Over the 5-year period, VONG has performed better with a 13.07% return vs 10.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, VONG or TDVG?

VONG is cheaper with a 0.06% expense ratio, compared with 0.50% for TDVG.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, VONG or TDVG?

TDVG has the higher dividend yield at 0.98%, compared with 0.47% for VONG.

What is the main difference between VONG and TDVG?

They also come from different issuers: Vanguard and T. Rowe Price. Their fees differ too: 0.06% for VONG and 0.50% for TDVG.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

TDVG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.81 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.