Data as of Oct 28, 2026.
GTO vs VPLS: Differences, Returns & Fees
GTO's duration was 5.7 years on Jul 31, 2026 and VPLS's 5.4 on Jun 30, 2026; VPLS charges 0.20% to GTO's 0.35%.
askIQ about this page
askIQ about GTO and VPLS
Net assets: $2.6bn on Oct 27, 2026 for Invesco Total Return Bond ETF, and $2.0bn on Sep 30, 2026 for Vanguard Core-Plus Bond ETF.
Pair scorecard
VPLS costs 0.15 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 0.4 points.
| Measure | GTO | VPLS |
|---|---|---|
| Return | ||
| Total return, 1 year | −1.4% | −1.0% |
| Drawdown | ||
| Below its high | 3.4%, high on Sep 14, 2021 | |
| Benchmark | ||
| What it tracks | No index, actively managed | No index, actively managed |
| Cost and size | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.35% | 0.20% |
| Net assets, GTO as of Oct 27, 2026 and VPLS as of Sep 30, 2026 | $2.6bn | $2.0bn |
| Holdings | ||
| Holdings in common | 3% | |
Holdings in common uses holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and Jul 31, 2026. Method
Risk and return
Dec 15, 2023 to Oct 23, 2026 · 149 weekly returnsEach against its own benchmark: GTO against AGG, Feb 19, 2016 to Oct 23, 2026; VPLS against IUSB, Dec 15, 2023 to Oct 23, 2026.
VPLS returned more: +10.7% to +9.4%. VPLS swung slightly less: 4.7% to 4.8%. VPLS fell slightly less at its worst: −4.1% to −4.4%.
Full scorecard
19 measures, with how each is measured Open ↓
| Measure | GTO | VPLS | Edge | How it is measured |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Return | ||||
| Total return | +9.4% | +10.7% | VPLS | Price change plus distributions, reinvested. |
| Annualized | +3.2% | +3.6% | VPLS | Total return as a yearly rate. |
| Price return | −4.4% | −2.6% | VPLS | Price change alone, distributions left out. |
| Risk | ||||
| Volatility | 4.8% | 4.7% | VPLS (slight) | Spread of weekly returns, annualized. Lower is steadier. |
| Downside deviation | 3.6% | 3.5% | VPLS (slight) | Like volatility, counting only weeks below the Treasury bill rate. |
| Max drawdown | −4.4% | −4.1% | VPLS (slight) | Deepest fall from a high to the low after it. |
| Upside capture | 97.2% | 102.5% | Share of its benchmark's rise caught in the weeks it rose. | |
| Downside capture | 89.8% | 99.5% | Share of its benchmark's fall taken in the weeks it fell. Lower is better. | |
| Beta | 0.92 | 1.01 | Not an edge | How far it moves for each 1% its benchmark moves. |
| R squared | 0.77 | 0.99 | Not an edge | Share of its weekly moves its benchmark explains. |
| Risk-adjusted | ||||
| Sharpe | −0.24 | −0.16 | VPLS | Return above Treasury bills per unit of volatility. |
| Sortino | −0.32 | −0.21 | VPLS | Return above Treasury bills per unit of downside deviation. |
| Treynor | 0.006 | −0.007 | Return above Treasury bills per unit of beta. | |
| Calmar | 0.72 | 0.88 | VPLS | Annualized return divided by the max drawdown. |
| Against the benchmark | ||||
| Benchmark | AGG | IUSB | The ETF each fund is measured against. | |
| Alpha | +1.2% a year | +0.5% a year | Not significant | Yearly return beyond what its beta to the benchmark predicts. |
| Alpha t-stat | 1.51 | 1.40 | Not an edge | How sure the alpha is. Below 2, it could be chance. |
| Alpha range | −0.4% to +2.7% | −0.2% to +1.1% | Includes zero | The 95% range for the yearly alpha. |
| Information ratio | 0.48 | 0.80 | Return against its benchmark per unit of tracking error. | |
| Tracking error | 2.6% | 0.5% | Not an edge | How far weekly returns stray from the benchmark, annualized. |
Computed by ETFIQ from Tiingo daily prices and ETFIQ's distribution records, 149 weekly returns. Cash rate: the 13-week Treasury bill.
What they share
By the books each fund has filed, GTO and VPLS hold 3% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and Jul 31, 2026.
half
3% in common
Only in one fund ↓
Side by side
GTO and VPLS on the fields both publish, as of Oct 28, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
GTO and VPLS are built for the same job. How do they differ in cost, holdings and results?
- Holdings in common. 3% of the weight is in the same securities (holdings dated Jul 31, 2026 and Jun 30, 2026).
- Cost. GTO charges 0.35% of assets a year and VPLS 0.20%, a gap of 0.15 points.
- What each follows (similar). Both follow No index, actively managed.
Data as of Oct 28, 2026.
The two-page PDF for this pair is coming. Save the comparison to follow its changes. Free. It needs an email sign-in, once.
GTO
GTO is actively managed and tracks no index. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned −1.4% with distributions reinvested, against −1.4% for its benchmark, the Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.35% a year. It sat 3.4% below its high of Sep 14, 2021 on Oct 28, 2026.
VPLS
VPLS is actively managed and tracks no index. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned −1.0% with distributions reinvested, against −1.2% for its benchmark, the Bloomberg U.S. Universal Bond Index. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.20% a year.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, GTO or VPLS?
- In the year to Oct 28, 2026, with distributions reinvested, GTO returned −1.4% and VPLS −1.0%.
- Which is cheaper, GTO or VPLS?
- VPLS is cheaper, by 0.15 percentage points a year. That is about $15 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Links are sources, not endorsements. A comparison is not a recommendation.
How this is computed
Overlap adds up the smaller of the two weights for each security both funds hold.
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown
ETFIQ, GTO against VPLS, data as of Oct 28, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/gto-vs-vpls
ETFIQ. (Oct 28, 2026). GTO against VPLS. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/compare/any/gto-vs-vpls
[GTO against VPLS (ETFIQ, Oct 28, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/compare/any/gto-vs-vpls)
Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.