BGX vs VTI
BGX vs VTI
Blackstone Long-Short Credit Income Fund vs Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF
Quick Verdict
VTI has a lower expense ratio. VTI delivered stronger 1-year returns. VTI offers more diversification with 2783 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BGX | VTI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 2.77% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $155M | $663.5B | |
| Dividend Yield | 8.01% | 1.07% | |
| Holdings | 592 | 3,543 | |
| YTD Return | -3.45% | +10.14% | |
| 1Y Return | -7.08% | +19.82% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +7.04% | +18.94% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +2.83% | +11.79% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.9% | 15.4% | |
| Max Drawdown | -58.0% | -56.6% | |
| Fund Family | The Blackstone Group Inc | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Jan 27, 2011 | May 24, 2001 |
BGX vs VTI Performance
Blackstone Long-Short Credit Income Fund (BGX) is a ETF from The Blackstone Group Inc and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year BGX returned -7.08% while VTI returned +19.82%. Year to date, BGX is down 3.45% versus a gain of 10.14% for VTI.
Over three years, BGX compounded at +7.04% per year against +18.94% for VTI; over five years the annualized figures are +2.83% and +11.79% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, VTI has the edge at +7.99% annualized vs -0.91%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.4% compared with 12.9% for BGX. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -58.0% for BGX and -56.6% for VTI. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.65. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BGX charges 2.77% per year while VTI charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $277 vs $3 annually, a gap of $274 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BGX currently yields 8.01% against 1.07% for VTI.
Holdings Overlap
BGX and VTI share 0 holdings out of 3107 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BGX or VTI?
BGX has an expense ratio of 2.77% while VTI charges 0.03%. VTI is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $274 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BGX or VTI?
Over the past year BGX returned -7.08% vs +19.82% for VTI, so VTI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), BGX annualized -0.91% vs +7.99% for VTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BGX or VTI?
VTI has been the more volatile fund at 15.4% annualized versus 12.9% for BGX. Worst drawdown: BGX -58.0% vs VTI -56.6%.
Should I hold both BGX and VTI?
BGX and VTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.65, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BGX and VTI?
BGX and VTI share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 3107 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BGX or VTI?
BGX yields 8.01% while VTI yields 1.07%, so BGX currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.