βš”οΈ Head to head

VVLU vs AGX1: Which ETF Is Better?

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

VVLU comes out ahead on 8 of 10 measures. Which matters most depends on you.

The short answer

πŸ’ΈLower feeVVLU wins
VVLU
0.28%
AGX1
1.10%

Worth about $52,495 on $100,000 over 20 years.

🏦Bigger fundVVLU wins
VVLU
$1.4bn
AGX1
$394m

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

πŸ“ˆ1-year returnVVLU wins
VVLU
+16.9%
AGX1
+9.1%
πŸ“Š3-year returnAGX1 wins
VVLU
+15.9% a yr
AGX1
+16.8% a yr
🏁5-year returnVVLU wins
VVLU
+12.0% a yr
AGX1
+9.6% a yr
βš–οΈCheaper to tradeVVLU wins
VVLU
0.05%
AGX1
0.30%

A tighter gap between the buy and sell price.

VVLU vs AGX1 side by side

VVLU leads on 8, AGX1 on 2VVLUVanguard Global Value Equity Active ETF.AGX1Antipodes Global Value Active ETF
The basics
Index trackedBenchmark: FTSE Developed All Cap IndexSee the PDS
Fund managerVanguardAntipodes
Asset classInternational sharesInternational shares
ListedApr 2018Nov 2018
Cost and size
MERyearly fee, lower is better0.28%βœ“1.10%
AUMfund size$1.4bnβœ“$394m
Net flows (Sep)new money in, last month$54mβœ“$2.1m
Bid/ask spreadtrading cost, lower is better0.05%βœ“0.30%
Total returns
1 monthβˆ’2.0%+0.6%βœ“
1 year+16.9%βœ“+9.1%
3 years p.a.+15.9%+16.8%βœ“
5 years p.a.+12.0%βœ“+9.6%
$10,000 invested
1 year ago$11,686βœ“$10,911
5 years ago$17,605βœ“$15,785

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

VVLU vs AGX1 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

$10,000 put into VVLU 5 years ago is worth $17,605 today, against $15,785 in AGX1. That is $1,820 more in VVLU.

VVLUAGX1$10,000 invested
$0k$5k$10k$15k$20k$11.7k$10.9k1 year agoVVLU +$775$15.6k$15.9k3 years agoAGX1 +$355$17.6k$15.8k5 years agoVVLU +$1,820

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

VVLU's lower fee leaves about $52,495 more in your pocket over 20 years.

VVLU charges 0.28% a yearAGX1 charges 1.10% a year
🧾 Fees paid on $100,000Saving
5 years
VVLU
βˆ’$1,826
AGX1
βˆ’$7,063
You keep$5,237more with VVLU
10 years
VVLU
βˆ’$5,087
AGX1
βˆ’$19,313
You keep$14,225more with VVLU
20 years
VVLU
βˆ’$19,757
AGX1
βˆ’$72,252
You keep$52,495more with VVLU

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 VVLU vs AGX1 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, VVLU or AGX1?

It depends on what you need. On our numbers VVLU wins on 8 measures and AGX1 on 2. VVLU is cheaper, with a management fee of 0.28% vs 1.10%. On $100,000 over 20 years that difference is worth about $52,495. VVLU is the larger fund at $1.4bn vs $394m. VVLU has the better 1-year return: +16.9% vs +9.1%.

Which is cheaper, VVLU or AGX1?

VVLU charges 0.28% a year and AGX1 charges 1.10% a year.

Can I hold both VVLU and AGX1?

You can, but check how much they overlap. VVLU is a international shares fund and AGX1 is a international shares fund.

More comparisons

VVLU vs DGVAVVLU vs VLUEDGVA vs AGX1VLUE vs AGX1

Add more ETFs to this comparison β†’

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