Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
VONG vs XLP: how they differ
VONG and XLP hold 2% of their weight in the same names, and VONG returned more over the year.
Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth Index Fund and State Street(R) Consumer Staples Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, VONG and XLP hold 2% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | VONG | XLP |
|---|---|---|
| Costco Wholesale Corp | 1.28% | 9.06% |
| Coca-Cola Co/The | 0.45% | 6.87% |
| Monster Beverage Corp | 0.18% | 4.47% |
| Walmart Inc | 0.15% | 10.84% |
| Colgate-Palmolive Co | 0.10% | 4.71% |
| PepsiCo Inc | 0.08% | 4.34% |
| Sysco Corp | 0.06% | 2.60% |
| Kimberly-Clark Corp | 0.04% | 2.37% |
| Casey's General Stores Inc | 0.01% | 1.91% |
| Hershey Co/The | 0.01% | 1.69% |
| Only in VONG | Only in XLP |
|---|---|
| NVIDIA Corp 13.09% | Procter & Gamble Co/The 7.46% |
| Apple Inc 11.97% | Philip Morris International Inc 6.16% |
| Microsoft Corp 8.98% | Altria Group Inc 4.55% |
| Broadcom Inc 5.78% | Mondelez International Inc 4.17% |
| Amazon.com Inc 5.07% | Target Corp 3.87% |
| Alphabet Inc 3.91% | Keurig Dr Pepper Inc 2.90% |
| Tesla Inc 3.48% | Archer-Daniels-Midland Co 2.40% |
| Meta Platforms Inc 3.20% | Kenvue Inc 2.39% |
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 Jun 30, 2026 and May 31, 2026.
| VONG Vanguard Russell 1000 Growth Index Fund | XLP State Street(R) Consumer Staples Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | Vanguard | State Street |
| What it is | Russell 1000 Growth | Consumer staples |
| Total return, 1 year | +7.2% | +6.3% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −10.3 pts | −11.2 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.07% | 0.08% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 95.6% | 100.0% |
| Holdings | 387 | 34 |
VONG in plain words
VONG is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 1000 Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +7.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.07% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 96% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 387 positions, with the top ten at 61.3%. It sat 4.9% below its high of Jun 1, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
XLP in plain words
XLP is an index equity fund tracking the Consumer staples. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +6.3% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.08% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 34 positions, with the top ten at 62.6%. It sat 6.2% below its high of Feb 27, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, VONG or XLP?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, VONG returned +7.2% and XLP returned +6.3%, so VONG returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, VONG or XLP?
- VONG charges 0.07% a year and XLP charges 0.08%, so VONG is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do VONG and XLP overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 96% of VONG and 100% of XLP by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 2% 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, VONG against XLP, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/VONG-XLP Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources