Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
URTH vs VDC: how they differ
URTH and VDC hold 3% of their weight in the same names, and URTH returned more over the year.
iShares MSCI World ETF and Vanguard Consumer Staples Index Fund.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, URTH and VDC hold 3% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | URTH | VDC |
|---|---|---|
| WALMART INC. | 0.56% | 14.76% |
| COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION | 0.47% | 12.04% |
| THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY | 0.37% | 9.27% |
| THE COCA-COLA COMPANY | 0.35% | 8.72% |
| Philip Morris International Inc. | 0.30% | 4.66% |
| Pepsico, Inc. | 0.22% | 4.30% |
| Altria Group, Inc. | 0.13% | 3.91% |
| Mondelez International, Inc. | 0.09% | 2.69% |
| COLGATE-PALMOLIVE COMPANY | 0.08% | 2.37% |
| MONSTER BEVERAGE CORPORATION | 0.07% | 2.24% |
| TARGET CORPORATION | 0.06% | 2.03% |
| ARCHER-DANIELS-MIDLAND COMPANY. | 0.04% | 1.41% |
| Only in URTH | Only in VDC |
|---|---|
| NVIDIA CORPORATION 5.64% | US Foods Holding Corp 0.74% |
| APPLE INC. 5.04% | Performance Food Group Co 0.66% |
| MICROSOFT CORPORATION 3.50% | Darling Ingredients Inc 0.52% |
| AMAZON.COM, INC. 2.86% | J M Smucker Co/The 0.51% |
| ALPHABET INC. 2.43% | BJ's Wholesale Club Holdings Inc 0.50% |
| BROADCOM INC. 2.21% | Sprouts Farmers Market Inc 0.46% |
| ALPHABET INC. 2.01% | Coca-Cola Consolidated Inc 0.45% |
| META PLATFORMS, INC. 1.51% | Primo Brands Corp 0.41% |
Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated May 31, 2026.
| URTH iShares MSCI World ETF | VDC Vanguard Consumer Staples Index Fund | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | Vanguard |
| What it is | MSCI World | Consumer Staples |
| Total return, 1 year | +17.4% | +4.6% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −0.1 pts | −12.9 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.24% | 0.09% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 70.3% | 86.6% |
| Holdings | 1322 | 103 |
URTH in plain words
URTH is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI World. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.24% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 70% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1322 positions, with the top ten at 27.8%.
VDC in plain words
VDC is an index equity fund tracking the Consumer Staples. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +4.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.09% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 87% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 103 positions, with the top ten at 65.0%. It sat 6.8% below its high of Feb 27, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, URTH or VDC?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, URTH returned +17.4% and VDC returned +4.6%, so URTH returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, URTH or VDC?
- URTH charges 0.24% a year and VDC charges 0.09%, so VDC is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do URTH and VDC overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 70% of URTH and 87% of VDC by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 3% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.
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, URTH against VDC, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/URTH-VDC Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources