βš”οΈ Head to head

FSML vs VLC: Which ETF Is Better?

A side-by-side comparison of fees, size, returns and holdings, using data to 30 September 2026.

VLC comes out ahead on 4 of 7 measures. Which matters most depends on you.

The short answer

πŸ’ΈLower feeVLC wins
FSML
0.85%
VLC
0.20%

Worth about $42,843 on $100,000 over 20 years.

🏦Bigger fundFSML wins
FSML
$638m
VLC
$310m

Bigger funds usually trade more cheaply and are less likely to close.

πŸ“ˆ1-year returnVLC wins
FSML
βˆ’1.4%
VLC
+7.1%
πŸ“Š3-year returnToo close to call
FSML
–
VLC
+11.7% a yr
🏁5-year returnToo close to call
FSML
–
VLC
+7.9% a yr
βš–οΈCheaper to tradeVLC wins
FSML
0.52%
VLC
0.05%

A tighter gap between the buy and sell price.

FSML vs VLC side by side

FSML leads on 3, VLC on 4FSMLFiretrail Australian Small Companies Fund – Active ETFVLCVanguard MSCI Australian Large Companies Index ETF
The basics
Index trackedSee the PDSMSCI Australian Shares Large Cap Index
Fund managerFiretrailVanguard
Asset classAustralian sharesAustralian shares
ListedNov 2024May 2011
Cost and size
MERyearly fee, lower is better0.85%0.20%βœ“
AUMfund size$638mβœ“$310m
Net flows (Sep)new money in, last month$20mβœ“βˆ’$1.8m
Bid/ask spreadtrading cost, lower is better0.52%0.05%βœ“
Total returns
1 monthβˆ’1.0%βœ“βˆ’1.6%
1 yearβˆ’1.4%+7.1%βœ“
3 years p.a.–+11.7%
5 years p.a.–+7.9%
$10,000 invested
1 year ago$9,864$10,707βœ“
5 years ago–$14,615

βœ“ marks the better figure on each measure. Returns include distributions, to 30 September 2026.

FSML vs VLC price chart

Both ETFs on one chart as % change. Use the 1D to All buttons to change the period. Price only, so it leaves out distributions Β· TradingView

πŸ“ˆ Growth

What $10,000 invested is worth now

Only VLC has a 5 years record: $10,000 then is worth $14,615 today.

FSMLVLC$10,000 invested
$0k$5k$10k$15k$20k$9.9k$10.7k1 year agoVLC +$843too new$13.9k3 years agotoo new$14.6k5 years ago

Total returns to 30 September 2026, with distributions reinvested, before tax and brokerage. The price chart above leaves out distributions, so it can look worse. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance.

πŸ’Έ Cost

What the fees cost you

VLC's lower fee leaves about $42,843 more in your pocket over 20 years.

FSML charges 0.85% a yearVLC charges 0.20% a year
🧾 Fees paid on $100,000Saving
5 years
FSML
βˆ’$5,483
VLC
βˆ’$1,306
You keep$4,177more with VLC
10 years
FSML
βˆ’$15,080
VLC
βˆ’$3,646
You keep$11,434more with VLC
20 years
FSML
βˆ’$57,055
VLC
βˆ’$14,212
You keep$42,843more with VLC

Total fees paid on a $100,000 investment, assuming a 7% a year return before fees. Illustration only: it ignores tax, brokerage and differences in returns.

Free PDF report

Get the full FSML vs VLC report

  • Every holding of each ETF: the top 50 companies, with sectors and countries
  • Exactly which companies they share, and how much of each
  • Fees in dollars over 10, 20 and 30 years
  • Every metric side by side, including the index each tracks
  • β˜… FREE BONUSIs now a good time to invest? The Market Health-O-Meter
⬇ Get the free report
Joshua Stega
etfadviserExchange traded fund specialist adviser Β· 20 years’ experience
Keep in touch with the marketsWeekly ETF research, the Market Health-O-Meter and our model portfolio.Try it free for 30 days β†’

FAQs

Which is better, FSML or VLC?

It depends on what you need. On our numbers FSML wins on 3 measures and VLC on 4. VLC is cheaper, with a management fee of 0.20% vs 0.85%. On $100,000 over 20 years that difference is worth about $42,843. FSML is the larger fund at $638m vs $310m. VLC has the better 1-year return: +7.1% vs βˆ’1.4%.

Which is cheaper, FSML or VLC?

FSML charges 0.85% a year and VLC charges 0.20% a year.

Can I hold both FSML and VLC?

You can, but check how much they overlap. FSML is a Australian shares fund and VLC is a Australian shares fund.

More comparisons

VSO vs FSMLFSML vs SMLLFSML vs MVSVSO vs VLCSYI vs VLC

Add more ETFs to this comparison β†’

General information only, not a recommendation. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance.