VVLU vs VLUE: Which ETF Is Better?
A side-by-side comparison of fees, size, returns and holdings, using data to 30 September 2026.
VLUE comes out ahead on 6 of 10 measures. Which matters most depends on you.
The short answer
Worth about $8,171 on $100,000 over 20 years.
Bigger funds usually trade more cheaply and are less likely to close.
A tighter gap between the buy and sell price.
VVLU vs VLUE side by side
| VVLU leads on 4, VLUE on 6 | VVLUVanguard Global Value Equity Active ETF. | VLUEVanEck MSCI International Value ETF |
|---|---|---|
| The basics | ||
| Index tracked | Benchmark: FTSE Developed All Cap Index | MSCI World ex Australia Enhanced Value Top 250 Select Index |
| Fund manager | Vanguard | VanEck |
| Asset class | International shares | International shares |
| Listed | Apr 2018 | Mar 2021 |
| Cost and size | ||
| MERyearly fee, lower is better | 0.28%✓ | 0.40% |
| AUMfund size | $1.4bn✓ | $643m |
| Net flows (Sep)new money in, last month | $54m✓ | $39m |
| Bid/ask spreadtrading cost, lower is better | 0.05%✓ | 0.08% |
| Total returns | ||
| 1 month | −2.0% | +0.5%✓ |
| 1 year | +16.9% | +46.8%✓ |
| 3 years p.a. | +15.9% | +25.5%✓ |
| 5 years p.a. | +12.0% | +16.5%✓ |
| $10,000 invested | ||
| 1 year ago | $11,686 | $14,682✓ |
| 5 years ago | $17,605 | $21,479✓ |
✓ marks the better figure on each measure. Returns include distributions, to 30 September 2026.
VVLU vs VLUE 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 · TradingView
What $10,000 invested is worth now
$10,000 put into VVLU 5 years ago is worth $17,605 today, against $21,479 in VLUE. That is $3,874 more in VLUE.
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.
What the fees cost you
VVLU's lower fee leaves about $8,171 more in your pocket over 20 years.
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.
VVLU and VLUE overlap
105 companies appear in both funds. Overlap is the share of the portfolio that is the same in both, counting the smaller weight of each shared company.
| Biggest shared holdings | % of VVLU | % of VLUE |
|---|---|---|
| 0.58% | 2.92% | |
| 0.57% | 2.50% | |
| 0.57% | 1.42% | |
| 0.53% | 0.69% | |
| 0.52% | 2.09% | |
| 0.50% | 0.88% | |
| 0.49% | 1.58% | |
| 0.49% | 1.49% | |
| 0.48% | 0.64% | |
| 0.47% | 1.16% | |
| 0.44% | 0.64% | |
| 0.40% | 0.78% |
Add more ETFs and see the overlap in Compare ETFs →
Best-endeavours estimate. Built from each issuer's published holdings, which may be weeks or months old, may cover only part of a fund (some publish only their top 10) and are matched by company name. Figures may be incomplete or inaccurate. Check the issuer's website and PDS before relying on them. General information only.
Get the full VVLU vs VLUE 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
- ★ FREE BONUSIs now a good time to invest? The Market Health-O-Meter
FAQs
Which is better, VVLU or VLUE?
It depends on what you need. On our numbers VVLU wins on 4 measures and VLUE on 6. VVLU is cheaper, with a management fee of 0.28% vs 0.40%. On $100,000 over 20 years that difference is worth about $8,171. VVLU is the larger fund at $1.4bn vs $643m. VLUE has the better 1-year return: +46.8% vs +16.9%.
Which is cheaper, VVLU or VLUE?
VVLU charges 0.28% a year and VLUE charges 0.40% a year.
Can I hold both VVLU and VLUE?
You can, but check how much they overlap. VVLU is a international shares fund and VLUE is a international shares fund.
More comparisons
General information only, not a recommendation. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance.