PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
VTWO vs. VUG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

VTWO vs. VUG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF (VTWO) and Vanguard Growth ETF (VUG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, VTWO achieves a 17.08% return, which is significantly higher than VUG's 9.49% return. Over the past 10 years, VTWO has underperformed VUG with an annualized return of 11.07%, while VUG has yielded a comparatively higher 18.26% annualized return.


VTWO

1D
-1.38%
1M
3.51%
YTD
17.08%
6M
15.89%
1Y
39.34%
3Y*
18.11%
5Y*
6.28%
10Y*
11.07%

VUG

1D
-1.23%
1M
6.22%
YTD
9.49%
6M
8.72%
1Y
27.84%
3Y*
25.93%
5Y*
15.11%
10Y*
18.26%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

VTWO vs. VUG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
VTWO
Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF
17.08%12.90%11.55%17.08%-20.49%14.79%20.22%25.81%-11.15%14.69%
VUG
Vanguard Growth ETF
9.49%19.40%32.69%46.83%-33.16%27.35%40.25%37.03%-3.32%27.72%

Correlation

The correlation between VTWO and VUG is 0.64, 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

0.64

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

0.62

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

0.72

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

0.71

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 23, 2010

0.77

The correlation between VTWO and VUG shifts across timeframes, from 0.62 (3 years) to 0.77 (all time), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

VTWO vs. VUG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
VTWO
VUG

Industrials

17.7%
3.6%

Technology

17.0%
53.5%

Healthcare

16.5%
4.6%

Financial Services

15.7%
4.3%

Consumer Cyclical

8.4%
12.2%

Real Estate

6.1%
1.0%

Energy

6.1%
0.4%

Basic Materials

4.8%
0.6%

Utilities

2.9%
0.9%

Communication Services

2.4%
17.3%

Consumer Defensive

2.4%
1.5%

Industrials

VTWO
17.7%
VUG
3.6%

Technology

VTWO
17.0%
VUG
53.5%

Healthcare

VTWO
16.5%
VUG
4.6%

Financial Services

VTWO
15.7%
VUG
4.3%

Consumer Cyclical

VTWO
8.4%
VUG
12.2%

Real Estate

VTWO
6.1%
VUG
1.0%

Energy

VTWO
6.1%
VUG
0.4%

Basic Materials

VTWO
4.8%
VUG
0.6%

Utilities

VTWO
2.9%
VUG
0.9%

Communication Services

VTWO
2.4%
VUG
17.3%

Consumer Defensive

VTWO
2.4%
VUG
1.5%

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

VTWO vs. VUG — Risk / Return Rank

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

VTWO
VTWO Risk / Return Rank: 6262
Overall Rank
VTWO Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6060
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VTWO Sortino Ratio Rank: 6060
Sortino Ratio Rank
VTWO Omega Ratio Rank: 5454
Omega Ratio Rank
VTWO Calmar Ratio Rank: 7171
Calmar Ratio Rank
VTWO Martin Ratio Rank: 6868
Martin Ratio Rank

VUG
VUG Risk / Return Rank: 4343
Overall Rank
VUG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 5050
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VUG Sortino Ratio Rank: 4747
Sortino Ratio Rank
VUG Omega Ratio Rank: 4848
Omega Ratio Rank
VUG Calmar Ratio Rank: 3333
Calmar Ratio Rank
VUG Martin Ratio Rank: 3737
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.

VTWO vs. VUG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF (VTWO) and Vanguard Growth ETF (VUG). 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.


VTWOVUGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

+0.31

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

+0.48

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.34

1.31

+0.03

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

3.60

1.69

+1.91

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

12.79

5.92

+6.86

VTWO vs. VUG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current VTWO Sharpe Ratio is 2.07, which is comparable to the VUG Sharpe Ratio of 1.77. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of VTWO and VUG, 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


VTWOVUGDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.07

1.77

+0.31

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.28

0.68

-0.40

Sharpe Ratio (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period

0.48

0.85

-0.37

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

0.52

0.62

-0.10

Drawdowns

VTWO vs. VUG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum VTWO drawdown since its inception was -41.19%, smaller than the maximum VUG drawdown of -50.68%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for VTWO and VUG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


VTWOVUGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-41.19%

-50.68%

+9.49%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-10.99%

-16.53%

+5.54%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-27.57%

-22.85%

-4.72%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-31.88%

-35.61%

+3.73%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-41.19%

-35.61%

-5.58%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.50%

-1.51%

+0.01%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-8.39%

-7.09%

-1.30%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

3.08%

4.71%

-1.63%

Volatility

VTWO vs. VUG - Volatility Comparison

Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF (VTWO) has a higher volatility of 5.73% compared to Vanguard Growth ETF (VUG) at 3.83%. This indicates that VTWO's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than VUG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


VTWOVUGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.73%

3.83%

+1.90%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

13.50%

12.11%

+1.39%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

19.12%

15.84%

+3.28%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

22.48%

22.22%

+0.26%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

23.08%

21.44%

+1.64%

VTWO vs. VUG - Expense Ratio Comparison

VTWO has a 0.10% expense ratio, which is higher than VUG's 0.03% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.


Dividends

VTWO vs. VUG - Dividend Comparison

VTWO's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.08%, more than VUG's 0.37% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
VTWO
Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF
1.08%1.25%1.21%1.45%1.48%1.13%0.92%1.36%1.41%1.18%1.27%1.23%
VUG
Vanguard Growth ETF
0.37%0.41%0.47%0.58%0.70%0.48%0.66%0.95%1.32%1.14%1.39%1.30%

Frequently Asked Questions


VTWO and VUG have a correlation of 0.64, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

VTWO has higher volatility (5.73%) compared to VUG (3.83%). In terms of maximum drawdown, VTWO dropped -41.19% vs VUG's -50.68%.

On 10-year performance, VUG leads with 18.26% vs 11.07% for VTWO. On fees, VUG is cheaper at 0.03% per year. On volatility, VUG has been the lower-risk option at 3.83%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 10-year period, VUG has performed better with a 18.26% return vs 11.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

VUG is cheaper with a 0.03% expense ratio, compared with 0.10% for VTWO.

VTWO has the higher dividend yield at 1.08%, compared with 0.37% for VUG.

VTWO is categorized as Small Cap Blend Equities, while VUG is Large Cap Growth Equities. VTWO tracks Russell 2000 Index, while VUG tracks CRSP US Large Cap Growth Index. Their fees differ too: 0.10% for VTWO and 0.03% for VUG.

VTWO currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.07 vs 1.77), 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 VTWO and VUG

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