VB vs VXUS: Which ETF Is Better in 2026?

A metric-by-metric comparison of Vanguard Small-Cap Index Fund ETF Shares (VB) and Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares (VXUS) — both US Small Cap / Global Multi-Region funds — using ETFValuer's daily-updated rankings.

Educational content — not financial advice. Data as of July 25, 2026. ~5 minute read.

The Verdict

VB (US Small Cap) and VXUS (Global Multi-Region) sit in different corners of the market, so this is less a head-to-head than a question of what role each would play. They can be complements rather than alternatives — the metrics below show how differently the two have actually behaved.

On ETFValuer's overall model — which blends return, risk-adjusted performance, cost, drawdown, size and volatility — VXUS scores higher: 76.5 (Grade B+) versus 69.0 for VB. That doesn't make VB a bad fund; it means VXUS currently edges it out on this specific mix of factors. Read the metric-by-metric breakdown below before deciding which matters more for your own portfolio.

Head-to-Head: Every Metric

VBVXUS
CategoryUS Small CapGlobal Multi-Region
Expense ratio0.03%0.05%
Fund size (AUM)$188.6B$650.3B
Dividend yield0.87%2.56%
1-year return+20.98%+20.76%
3-year return+47.74%+56.94%
Volatility16.40%16.66%
Max drawdown-25.36%-13.58%
Sharpe ratio0.970.95
ETFValuer score69.076.5
GradeBB+
Overall rank#123#32

Bold marks the better value in each row. "Better" is directional only (e.g. lower cost, higher return) — it isn't a recommendation by itself. See the full methodology.

Cost

On cost, the two are essentially tied — VB charges 0.03% a year versus VXUS's 0.05%. A difference this small (about $2.00 a year on a $10,000 position) isn't a reason to choose one fund over the other.

What VXUS's Fees Cost You

VXUS charges an expense ratio of 0.05% a year, deducted automatically from the fund's value. Small percentages compound into real money — adjust the figures below to see the impact on your own numbers.

$46,609.57
$46,179.89
$429.68
Cheaper alternative in this category: VB charges 0.03% vs VXUS's 0.05%. On the figures above you'd keep $171.42 more over 20 years — same assumed 8% gross return, fee difference only.

Assumes a constant gross return and no additional contributions — a simplification, but it isolates exactly what the expense ratio costs. Try the full fee calculator to model contributions and compare any two funds.

Performance & Risk

Over the trailing 3 years, VXUS returned +56.94% versus +47.74% for VB — a gap of about 9.2 percentage points. On risk, VXUS has held up better historically, with a shallower max drawdown (-13.58% vs. -25.36%). VB currently has the better risk-adjusted return (Sharpe ratio of 0.97 vs. 0.95), meaning it delivered more return per unit of volatility taken on.

How Closely Do They Track Each Other?

Over the last 3.0 years of daily returns (752 shared trading days), VB and VXUS show a strong correlation of 0.753 — clearly related, with room to diverge. There is some genuine differentiation here, but not enough to call these complementary holdings. Pairing them mostly concentrates risk rather than spreading it.

MeasureValueWhat it means
Daily return correlation0.753Strong — clearly related, with room to diverge
R-squared56.7%56.7% of VB's daily moves are explained by VXUS's
Tracking error (annualised)12.47%Typical yearly spread between the two funds' returns
Annualised return over 3.0yVB +14.50% · VXUS +16.64%VXUS ahead by 2.14 points a year

Correlation alone understates how far these can drift. Across every rolling 12-month window in the period, VB finished as much as +24.9 points ahead of VXUS at the best extreme and -27.3 points at the worst — a 52.1-point spread between the best and worst year of relative performance. Two funds can correlate tightly day to day and still deliver very different outcomes over any single year you happen to hold them.

Calculated from daily total returns over the trailing 3-year window, recomputed every day this site refreshes. Correlation of 1.00 means the two funds moved in lockstep; 0.00 means their daily moves were unrelated.

Holdings Overlap

VB and VXUS hold 1 of the same companies among their top 10 positions. Those shared names make up 1.1% of VB and 2.5% of VXUS. That's modest duplication — the funds are mostly distinct at the top, so holding both can still add diversification.

Shared HoldingVB WeightVXUS Weight
Vanguard Cmt Funds-Vanguard Market Liquidity Fund1.11%2.48%

Compares the top 10 reported holdings from each fund's most recent SEC N-PORT-P filing, so it understates total overlap — funds tracking similar indexes overlap far more deeply than the top 10 alone can show. Search any company across all tracked funds with the Stock Overlap tool.

Which One Should You Pick?

Lean VB if…

  • You want the lower running cost — 0.03% vs 0.05%, about $2 a year less on a $10,000 position

Lean VXUS if…

  • Current income matters to you — it yields 2.56% against 0.87%
  • You weight recent results heavily — it returned 56.9% over 3 years against 47.7%
  • You want the deeper, more liquid market ($650B in assets vs $189B)

These two are not really substitutes, so "both, in some proportion" is often the right answer rather than picking one. Model the blend with the Portfolio Blender.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is VB or VXUS better?

On ETFValuer's overall model — which blends return, risk-adjusted performance, cost, drawdown, size and volatility — VXUS scores higher: 76.5 (Grade B+) versus 69.0 for VB. That doesn't make VB a bad fund; it means VXUS currently edges it out on this specific mix of factors. Read the metric-by-metric breakdown below before deciding which matters more for your own portfolio.

Which has the lower expense ratio, VB or VXUS?

VB currently has the lower expense ratio (0.03% vs. 0.05%).

Can I hold both VB and VXUS?

Yes, and it may be worth doing. VB and VXUS correlate at only 0.75 over the past 3.0 years, so they behave differently enough that holding both is a genuine diversification decision rather than a redundant one. Size each to the role you want it to play.

Go deeper on either fund

Full daily-updated metrics, holdings context, and category peers.

Related Comparisons