Investors interested in large-cap U.S. growth equities often consider exchange-traded funds (ETFs) that provide concentrated exposure to these segments of the market. Two such options from Vanguard are the Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth ETF (VONG) and the Vanguard Growth ETF (VUG). While both are designed to capture growth-oriented large-cap companies, they diverge in the indices they track, stock counts, and certain performance and risk metrics, which this article explores in detail.
Fund Profiles and Basic Metrics
Both VONG and VUG are managed by Vanguard and serve to replicate the performance of established growth indexes. VONG follows the Russell 1000 Growth Index and encompasses 391 individual stocks, whereas VUG tracks the CRSP US Large Cap Growth Index and holds 160 stocks. This fundamental difference influences portfolio breadth and sector weightings.
Regarding costs, VUG features a slightly lower expense ratio of 0.04%, compared to VONG’s 0.07%. Though the margin is narrow, cost-conscious investors may find VUG marginally more attractive on this basis. In dividend terms, VONG offers a modestly higher yield at 0.45%, overshadowing VUG’s 0.42%, which may appeal to investors with a focus on income generation alongside growth.
Comparative Performance and Risk Metrics
Examining recent returns, as of December 28, 2025, VUG recorded a one-year total return of 18.02%, slightly ahead of VONG’s 17.17%. However, over a five-year horizon, VONG slightly outperformed with a growth of $1,000 to $2,010, compared to VUG’s $1,970. The differences are minor but reflect the balance between broader diversification and concentration.
Volatility measures reveal VUG as somewhat more volatile, with a 5-year beta of 1.23 versus VONG’s 1.17, relative to the S&P 500. Maximum drawdown over five years is also deeper in VUG at -35.61% compared with VONG’s -32.71%, suggesting VUG experiences more pronounced market swings.
Portfolio Composition and Sector Exposure
Both funds predominantly allocate assets to technology, with VONG assigning 55% and VUG 53% to this sector. Other notable sectors include consumer cyclical and communication services; VONG holds 13% and 12% respectively, while VUG allocates approximately 14% to each. The consistency in sector weights underscores their alignment in growth themes.
The leading holdings in both ETFs are virtually identical, dominated by technology giants Nvidia, Apple, and Microsoft, each constituting more than 10% of total assets in VONG and representing a similarly significant portion in VUG. Neither fund applies specialized environmental, social, and governance (ESG) overlays or unusual portfolio adjustments.
Investment Considerations for Growth-Focused Investors
A salient factor differentiating these ETFs is portfolio diversification. VONG’s broader collection of 391 stocks offers more diversification, which can help mitigate risk during economic instability or market volatility by spreading exposure across a wider selection of companies. However, this breadth may introduce the possibility that lower-performing stocks dilute overall returns.
Conversely, VUG’s more concentrated portfolio with 160 stocks targets a narrower group of growth leaders, which may enhance potential returns if those selected securities perform well. Nonetheless, this concentration associates with higher measured volatility, as indicated by the beta and drawdown statistics.
For investors prioritizing lower management fees and a focused exposure, VUG presents an attractive proposition. Those emphasizing broader diversification to address risk, especially in turbulent markets, may find VONG’s extensive holdings preferable.
Conclusion
Both VONG and VUG are reputable vehicles for accessing large-cap growth opportunities in the U.S. equity market. They share commonalities in top holdings and sector weightings but diverge primarily in index tracking, portfolio breadth, and slight differences in fees and volatility.
While VUG is marginally cheaper and more concentrated, thus potentially offering greater upside with increased risk, VONG provides greater diversification with a slightly higher dividend yield, catering to investors seeking to moderate volatility. The choice between these funds ultimately depends on individual risk tolerance, investment horizon, and preferences regarding diversification and cost structure.