Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
AGG vs VUSB: how they differ
AGG is a bond index fund and VUSB a short-term Treasury fund, and over the year VUSB returned more, +3.7% against −0.7%.
iShares Core U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF and Vanguard Ultra-Short Bond ETF.
| AGG iShares Core U.S. Aggregate Bond ETF | VUSB Vanguard Ultra-Short Bond ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | Vanguard |
| What it is | US aggregate bonds | Ultra-Short Bond |
| Total return, 1 year | −0.7% | +3.7% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −18.2 pts | −13.8 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.03% | 0.10% |
| Holdings | not filed | 1281 |
AGG in plain words
AGG is a bond fund tracking the US aggregate bonds. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned −0.7% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.03% a year. It sat 3.7% below its high of Aug 4, 2020 on Sep 11, 2026.
VUSB in plain words
VUSB is a cash and treasury bills tracking the Ultra-Short Bond. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +3.7% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.10% a year.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, AGG or VUSB?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, AGG returned −0.7% and VUSB returned +3.7%, so VUSB returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, AGG or VUSB?
- AGG charges 0.03% a year and VUSB charges 0.10%, so AGG is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Other comparisons
Where to next
Where these figures came from
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, AGG against VUSB, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/AGG-VUSB Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources