Data as of Oct 28, 2026.

vsCompare their flowsaskIQ about these two fundsAsk the committee about these two funds
Across categories

VPL vs XOVR: Differences, Returns & Fees

Share
Share on XDownload as PDF

Over the year to Oct 28, 2026, VPL returned +24.8% to XOVR's −3.0%; 0% of their weight is in the same names.

askIQ about this page

askIQ about VPL and XOVR

Net assets: $9.0bn on Sep 30, 2026 for Vanguard FTSE Pacific ETF, and $2.2bn on Jun 30, 2026 for ERShares Private-Public Crossover ETF.

At a glance
+24.8%
VPL total return, 1 year
−3.0%
XOVR total return, 1 year
0.07%
VPL expense ratio
1.81%
XOVR expense ratio

Pair scorecard

VPL costs 1.74 points a year less; their one-year returns differ by 27.8 points.

VPL vs XOVR: Differences, Returns & Fees
MeasureVPLXOVR
Return
Total return, 1 year+24.8%−3.0%
Drawdown
Below its high7.2%, high on Jun 22, 20266.5%, high on Oct 5, 2026
Benchmark
What it tracksFTSE Developed Asia Pacific All Cap IndexNo index, actively managed
Cost and size
Expense ratio0.07%1.81%
Net assets, VPL as of Sep 30, 2026 and XOVR as of Jun 30, 2026$9.0bn$2.2bn
Holdings
Holdings in common0%
Top ten holdings, share of the fund24.8%63.1%

Holdings in common uses holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and Sep 30, 2026. Method

What they share

0%

By the books each fund has filed, VPL and XOVR hold 0% of their money in the same securities at the same weight. Holdings dated Jun 30, 2026 and Sep 30, 2026.

0 half 100%

half

0% in common

Positions both hold · largest shared weight first VPL XOVR
Only in one fund ↓
Only in VPL
Samsung Electronics Co Ltd 7.11%
SK hynix Inc 5.82%
Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Inc 1.98%
BHP Group Ltd 1.69%
SLBBH1142 1.57%
Toyota Motor Corp 1.51%
Commonwealth Bank of Australia 1.37%
Tokyo Electron Ltd 1.30%
Only in XOVR
N/A 17.73%
Nvidia Corp 9.47%
Astera Labs Inc 7.75%
Alphabet Inc 6.52%
Meta Platforms Inc 4.47%
Applovin Corp 3.95%
Natera Inc 3.70%
Robinhood Markets Inc 3.55%
Check overlap with more funds →

Side by side

VPL Vanguard FTSE Pacific ETF XOVR ERShares Private-Public Crossover ETF
Where it sits Stock ETF Stock ETF
Issuer Vanguard ERShares
What it is Tracks an index of Pacific Stock Actively managed
Total return, 1 year +24.8% −3.0%
Expense ratio 0.07% 1.81%
Already in the S&P 500 0.0% 43.4%
Holdings 2343 32
Net assets, VPL as of Sep 30, 2026 and XOVR as of Jun 30, 2026 $9.0bn $2.2bn

VPL and XOVR on the fields both publish, as of Oct 28, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.

Alert

The week's ETF fund flows, by email on Sundays.

One-click unsubscribe. See Privacy.

About each fund
VPL

VPL tracks an index of Pacific Stock. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned +24.8% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.07% a year. By its holdings published by its issuer as of Sep 30, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 2,343 positions, with the top ten at 24.8%. It sat 7.2% below its high of Jun 22, 2026 on Oct 28, 2026.

XOVR

XOVR is actively managed and tracks no index. Over the year to Oct 28, 2026 it returned −3.0% with distributions reinvested. The prospectus expense ratio is 1.81% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 43% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 32 positions, with the top ten at 63.1%. It sat 6.5% below its high of Oct 5, 2026 on Oct 28, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, VPL or XOVR?
In the year to Oct 28, 2026, with distributions reinvested, VPL returned +24.8% and XOVR −3.0%.
Which is cheaper, VPL or XOVR?
VPL is cheaper, by 1.74 percentage points a year. That is about $174 on $10,000 held for a year. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do VPL and XOVR overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of VPL and 43% of XOVR by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds.
Other comparisons
Cite this pageCitation, APA and Markdown

ETFIQ, VPL against XOVR, data as of Oct 28, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/vpl-vs-xovr

Open data →

Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms.