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

Performance

XLF vs. VONG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) 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, XLF achieves a 3.21% return, which is significantly higher than VONG's 1.26% return. Over the past 10 years, XLF has underperformed VONG with an annualized return of 13.37%, while VONG has yielded a comparatively higher 17.53% annualized return.


XLF

1D
-0.39%
1M
4.98%
6M
3.83%
YTD
3.21%
1Y
8.32%
3Y*
18.56%
5Y*
10.80%
10Y*
13.37%
ALL TIME*
6.03%

VONG

1D
0.02%
1M
-3.07%
6M
1.81%
YTD
1.26%
1Y
10.58%
3Y*
20.30%
5Y*
12.21%
10Y*
17.53%
ALL TIME*
16.55%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XLF vs. VONG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020201920182017
XLF
State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF
3.21%14.90%30.56%12.03%-10.59%34.80%-1.74%31.88%-13.06%22.00%
VONG
Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF
1.26%18.45%33.20%42.67%-29.18%27.60%38.30%36.06%-1.53%30.05%

Correlation

The correlation between XLF and VONG is 0.36, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.


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

0.36

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

0.44

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

0.57

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

0.54

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Sep 22, 2010

0.63

Over the past year, the correlation between XLF and VONG has dropped to 0.36 - well below their long-term average of 0.63, suggesting their price drivers have been diverging.

XLF vs. VONG - Sectors Allocation Comparison


Sectors
XLF
VONG

Financial Services

98.2%
4.2%

Technology

1.6%
54.3%

Industrials

0.2%
9.0%

Basic Materials

-

0.3%

Communication Services

-

16.2%

Consumer Cyclical

-

8.4%

Consumer Defensive

-

1.2%

Energy

-

0.5%

Healthcare

-

5.4%

Real Estate

-

0.4%

Utilities

-

0.3%

Financial Services

XLF
98.2%
VONG
4.2%

Technology

XLF
1.6%
VONG
54.3%

Industrials

XLF
0.2%
VONG
9.0%

Basic Materials

XLF

-

VONG
0.3%

Communication Services

XLF

-

VONG
16.2%

Consumer Cyclical

XLF

-

VONG
8.4%

Consumer Defensive

XLF

-

VONG
1.2%

Energy

XLF

-

VONG
0.5%

Healthcare

XLF

-

VONG
5.4%

Real Estate

XLF

-

VONG
0.4%

Utilities

XLF

-

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

XLF vs. VONG — Risk / Return Rank

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

XLF
XLF Risk / Return Rank: 2020
Overall Rank
XLF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2222
Sharpe Ratio Rank
XLF Sortino Ratio Rank: 2121
Sortino Ratio Rank
XLF Omega Ratio Rank: 2020
Omega Ratio Rank
XLF Calmar Ratio Rank: 1919
Calmar Ratio Rank
XLF Martin Ratio Rank: 1919
Martin Ratio Rank

VONG
VONG Risk / Return Rank: 2222
Overall Rank
VONG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 2323
Sharpe Ratio Rank
VONG Sortino Ratio Rank: 2323
Sortino Ratio Rank
VONG Omega Ratio Rank: 2222
Omega Ratio Rank
VONG Calmar Ratio Rank: 2020
Calmar Ratio Rank
VONG Martin Ratio Rank: 2323
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.

XLF vs. VONG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) 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.

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.


XLFVONGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.06

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.09

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.11

1.12

-0.01

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.56

0.65

-0.09

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

1.43

2.04

-0.61

XLF vs. VONG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLF Sharpe Ratio is 0.57, which is comparable to the VONG Sharpe Ratio of 0.63. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLF 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...

Drawdowns

XLF vs. VONG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLF drawdown since its inception was -82.69%, which is greater than VONG's maximum drawdown of -32.72%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLF and VONG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


XLFVONGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-82.69%

-32.72%

-49.97%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-14.79%

-16.23%

+1.44%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-15.54%

-23.27%

+7.73%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-25.81%

-32.72%

+6.91%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-42.86%

-32.72%

-10.14%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-1.25%

-7.09%

+5.84%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-19.95%

-4.88%

-15.07%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

5.81%

5.19%

+0.62%

Volatility

XLF vs. VONG - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF) is 4.07%, while Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF (VONG) has a volatility of 6.36%. This indicates that XLF experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than VONG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


XLFVONGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

4.07%

6.36%

-2.29%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

11.28%

13.59%

-2.31%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

14.66%

16.92%

-2.26%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

18.45%

21.57%

-3.12%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

22.07%

20.97%

+1.10%

XLF vs. VONG - Expense Ratio Comparison

XLF has a 0.08% expense ratio, which is higher than VONG's 0.06% 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

XLF vs. VONG - Dividend Comparison

XLF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 1.44%, more than VONG's 0.47% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
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%
XLF
State Street Financial Select Sector SPDR ETF
1.44%1.31%1.42%1.71%2.04%1.63%2.03%1.87%2.08%1.48%21.10%1.95%

Frequently Asked Questions


XLF and VONG have a correlation of 0.36, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

VONG has higher volatility (6.36%) compared to XLF (4.07%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XLF dropped -82.69% vs VONG's -32.72%.

On 10-year performance, VONG leads with 17.53% vs 13.37% for XLF. On fees, VONG is cheaper at 0.06% per year. On volatility, XLF has been the lower-risk option at 4.07%. 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 17.53% return vs 13.37%. 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 0.08% for XLF.

XLF has the higher dividend yield at 1.44%, compared with 0.47% for VONG.

XLF is categorized as Financials Equities, while VONG is Large Cap Growth Equities. XLF tracks Financial Select Sector Index, while VONG tracks Russell 1000 Growth Index. They also come from different issuers: State Street and Vanguard. Their fees differ too: 0.08% for XLF and 0.06% for VONG.

VONG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (0.63 vs 0.57), 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 XLF 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