Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
LYTE vs VCSH: how they differ
LYTE and VCSH are measured over different days, and VCSH charges 0.03% against 0.65%.
Roundhill Photonics & Optics ETF and Vanguard Short-Term Corporate Bond Index Fund.
| LYTE Roundhill Photonics & Optics ETF | VCSH Vanguard Short-Term Corporate Bond Index Fund | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Thematic ETF | Core index fund |
| Issuer | Roundhill | Vanguard |
| What it is | Photonics and optics | Short-Term Corporate Bond |
| Total return, 1 year | −0.4% | +1.6% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | −0.6% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +0.1 pts | −15.9 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.65% | 0.03% |
| Holdings | not filed | 2999 |
LYTE in plain words
LYTE has no public holdings filing captured yet. Since it launched on Aug 6, 2026 the fund returned −0.4% with distributions reinvested against −0.6% for the S&P 500, so a holder was about even. It sits 11.4% below its all-time high of Aug 17, 2026.
VCSH in plain words
VCSH is a bond fund tracking the Short-Term Corporate Bond. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +1.6% 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.
Questions people ask
- Which is cheaper, LYTE or VCSH?
- LYTE charges 0.65% a year and VCSH charges 0.03%, so VCSH is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- Are LYTE and VCSH the same kind of fund?
- No. LYTE is a thematic ETF and VCSH is an index ETF, so they are built for different jobs. The table compares what both publish: return, cost and what each actually holds.
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, LYTE against VCSH, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/LYTE-VCSH Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources