XEQT and VEQT are globally diversified all-equity portfolios, while VFV tracks large US companies in the S&P 500. This comparison explains their fees, holdings, concentration, historical returns and Canadian account considerations without treating any fund as a universal choice.
How much do MER fees really cost you over 20+ years?
Run the numbers on XEQT (0.19%), VEQT (0.22%) or VFV (0.09%) against your own portfolio — free, no signup.
See how MER fees cost you over 20+ years → Free, no signupA lower fee and a different portfolio are not the same comparison. Start with global versus US-only exposure; then check fees and holdings you may already own.
Compare XEQT and VFV using their published holdings. See the shared stocks and the coverage behind the estimate, then change the symbols to explore another pair.
Check ETF overlap — free →No signup required. The estimate uses available holdings, not your account balances.| ETF | Issuer | MER | Allocation | Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| XEQT | iShares (BlackRock) | 0.19% | 100% global equities | Aggressive all-in-one |
| VEQT | Vanguard Canada | 0.22% | 100% global equities | Aggressive all-in-one |
| VFV | Vanguard Canada | 0.09% | 500 US stocks (S&P 500) | Single-market US |
Open the public WealthWise profiles for XEQT, VEQT or VFV, or see the current VEQT fee, holdings, allocation and distribution summary.
XEQT fee update: iShares currently publishes a 0.19% MER and a 0.17% management fee for XEQT following the management-fee reduction effective December 18, 2025.
VEQT fee update: Vanguard reduced VEQT's management fee to 0.17% effective November 18, 2025. Its currently published 0.22% MER is calculated at the fund's fiscal year-end and does not yet fully reflect that reduction.
Both are globally diversified all-equity portfolios. Their main differences are the fund provider, management fee and regional target weights, including a somewhat larger Canadian allocation in VEQT.
VFV tracks the S&P 500 and is concentrated in large US companies. XEQT and VEQT hold Canadian, US, international developed and emerging-market equities in one fund.
A lower MER reduces annual fund costs, but fees are only one part of the comparison. Geographic diversification, concentration and fund structure also differ between the funds.
XEQT and VEQT already hold many of the large US companies found in VFV. Adding VFV therefore increases the US large-cap weight rather than adding a completely separate market.
TL;DR: XEQT and VEQT are both global all-equity portfolios with different target weights. VFV is structurally different because it tracks only the S&P 500. Fees, diversification and concentration therefore need to be compared together.
Explore one difference at a time ↓
A short checklist for checking whether another ETF adds diversification or mainly repeats what you already own.
This is where the difference shows up. XEQT and VEQT both aim for global diversification, but with different weightings:
| Region | XEQT | VEQT | VFV |
|---|---|---|---|
| United States | ~45% | ~45% | 100% |
| Canada | ~26% | ~30% | 0% |
| International developed | ~24% | ~18% | 0% |
| Emerging markets | ~5% | ~7% | 0% |
VEQT has a stronger Canadian home country bias (about 30% vs 26%). Their US weights are currently similar, while XEQT has more international-developed exposure and VEQT has more emerging-market exposure. Allocations change as markets move and the funds rebalance.
The MER (Management Expense Ratio) is charged annually on your assets. On $1,000 invested over 30 years with a 7% annualized return:
| MER | Final value | Cumulative cost in fees |
|---|---|---|
| 0.09% (VFV) | ~$7,422 | ~$190 |
| 0.19% (XEQT) | ~$7,217 | ~$395 |
| 0.22% (VEQT) | ~$7,156 | ~$456 |
In this simplified constant-return illustration, the fee difference produces about $266 more ending value for VFV than VEQT per $1,000 invested. It does not account for different market exposures, taxes, tracking difference or changing fees, so it is not a forecast.
| Account | US withholding context | Comparison point |
|---|---|---|
| RRSP | Withholding can occur at the fund level for Canadian-listed ETFs | Treatment differs from holding a US-listed security directly |
| TFSA | US-dividend withholding is generally not recoverable | The effect varies with US exposure and dividend yield |
| Non-registered | Canadian and foreign dividends receive different tax treatment | After-tax results depend on the investor and province |
Source: iShares (BlackRock Canada) and Vanguard Canada official fund fact sheets, as cited in the article.
A common myth worth clearing up: the Canada-US tax treaty only exempts the 15% withholding on US dividends if the US-listed security is held directly in an RRSP (for example, VOO or VTI). VFV, XEQT and VEQT are Canadian-listed ETFs (.TO): the 15% is withheld at the fund level before the dividend reaches the account, so the treaty exemption does not apply to them. A US-listed ETF changes that treatment but also introduces USD conversion and operational differences (see Norbert's Gambit).
No treaty exemption applies — the 15% withholding on US dividends is not recoverable in a TFSA. The amount depends on the fund's US exposure and dividend yield, so it is one input in the comparison rather than a complete measure of expected return.
Dividend taxation varies by source. Eligible Canadian dividends and foreign dividends receive different Canadian tax treatment, so the funds' different geographic weights can produce different after-tax outcomes. Personal circumstances and provincial rules also matter.
Source: iShares (BlackRock Canada) and Vanguard Canada official fund pages, accessed September 4, 2026.
XEQT and VEQT both combine several regional equity markets in one fund. VFV is a single-market building block focused on large US companies, so it does not provide the same geographic coverage on its own.
The funds differ in US exposure, dividend yield and diversification. US-dividend withholding is not recoverable in a TFSA, but it should be assessed together with fees, concentration and the role of the fund in the overall portfolio.
VFV has a lower published MER than XEQT and VEQT, but it covers only the S&P 500. Recreating a global allocation with several funds adds allocation and rebalancing decisions that do not exist in the same way with a one-ticket portfolio.
VFV provides direct S&P 500 exposure. That also produces greater geographic and company concentration than the globally diversified funds.
VEQT has a higher Canadian target weight than XEQT. This changes the portfolio's exposure to Canadian financials, energy and materials, among other sectors.
Compare all three funds over the same start and end dates, in Canadian dollars, using the same treatment of reinvested distributions and fees. A price chart alone is not a total-return comparison. The issuers publish dated performance histories in the official product pages linked below.
Different US, Canadian and international weights can produce different results in any period. A past lead does not establish which fund will outperform next; these funds do not have identical market exposure.
Three other tickers come up constantly in the same debate. Here is where they fit:
Quick answer for the most common account questions:
XEQT and VEQT package global equity markets into one rebalanced fund, with different regional targets. VFV tracks the S&P 500 at a lower published fee but carries much greater US large-cap concentration. The relevant comparison depends on the exposure being measured, not on a universal ranking.
Something to consider: track your portfolio with WealthWise to see the geographic and sector allocation, and the performance of each of your ETFs. You can also open the sample portfolio demo before creating an account.
Analyze my portfolio exposures →Fund figures were reviewed against the official product pages on September 4, 2026. Fees and allocations can change.
Wealth