VDE holdings

Computed by this site from the fund's SEC Form N-PORT filing; what the measure does not tell you · every fund in one table · hold it with other funds? X-ray the mix. Pricing: 100% at a quoted market price (level 1), one issuer country.

VDE's largest investment is Exxon Mobil Corp at 21.26% of net assets. Chevron Corp and Conocophillips follow; the three together are 41.48%. Ten companies are 63.95% of the fund; the other 96 share the rest. Among the 721 equity funds measured here, VDE behaves like 12.3 holdings against a median of 42.4 — 3.4 times more concentrated than the median. Across 27 quarterly filings VDE has held roughly steady since 2019-11-30 (10 then, 12.3 now). Between the 2026-02-28 and 2026-05-31 filings 0 positions were added and 2 dropped; 5.6% of the weight moved.

Each sentence is read from the fund's own SEC filing; the class median is computed across the comparable equity funds on this site. Nothing here is a view on the fund.

Between 2019-11-30 and 2026-05-31, VDE went from behaving like 10 equally weighted positions to 12.3 — 23% more, while its top ten went from 69.83% to 63.95% of net assets. Read across the funds on the concentration-over-time table.

One row per filed reporting period, newest first, read from EDGAR. Quarterly because that is the public filing cadence. Rows marked * are published but held out of the comparison above; the methodology page says when and why.

Measured against every other fund on this site, from the same filings. Combined effective holdings is how the pair behaves held in equal size.

The 15 largest of 106 positions in VDE's Form N-PORT, weight as a share of net assets, securities-lending collateral excluded. Every position, every quarter: VDE.csv.gz.

Monthly total returns from Item B.5 of VDE's own filings, 81 months on record. Not computed here and not from a price feed.

Cross-checked against a series computed separately from prices: median difference 0.04 percentage points over 81 months, which is roughly the distributions. Every month with the filing it came from: VDE.json · all funds.

The fund lends its holdings, and Item B.4.a of the filing names every firm holding them. At 2026-05-31, $9m was out to 10 borrowers, 0.07% of net assets. The largest, MORGAN STANLEY & CO LLC, held 41.9% of it.

Cash collateral reported against the loan: 0.09% of net assets, 121.1% of the amount lent. That is a floor on the collateral, not the whole of it — collateral the fund does not hold as a position is not in this filing, so a figure under 100% is not evidence of under-collateralisation. How that figure behaves across all funds. Every quarter VDE has filed, with each borrower: VDE.json · all funds.

108 positions became 106: 0 added (0.0% of the fund at the later date), 2 dropped (1.0% at the earlier date). Half the sum of all weight changes, a turnover proxy: 5.6%. Positions are matched on identifiers, so a security whose identifier changed shows as one drop and one add. Every filing of VDE compared this way, as a feed: changes.xml · all funds: filings received.

Gone: Coterra Energy Inc (0.99%), N/A (0.01%).

99.84% equity, 0.16% short-term investment as filed; 100.0% carried at a quoted market price (fair-value level 1). Categories and levels are the filer's; what a low level-1 share does and does not mean is in the measure's page.

A position count cannot describe a fund that uses derivatives, because a swap is filed at its unrealised gain, not its exposure. These are the notionals the fund itself reported, against net assets of $11.79B. Notional of an interest-rate or currency swap is not equity exposure.

Financing leg as filed: the fund pays OBFR01 + 0% on $61M of long swap notional . Issuers fill the spread field differently (some file the all-in rate), so compare within an issuer, not across.

Full detail for every fund that files derivatives: leverage.json (CC BY 4.0).

Every measured equity fund lined up by how many holdings it behaves like; these sit either side of VDE (12.3). Same filings, same arithmetic. Position in this list says nothing about which fund is better.

• 005 Expense ratio
• 004 Maximum drawdown
• 004 Duration
• 004 Beta
• 003 Standard deviation
• 003 Total return
• 003 Correlation

• XLE vs VDE: Which Energy ETF Benefits Most from Oil Shocks?

  XLE and VDE deliver nearly identical 5-year results (CAGR 22.7% vs 23.2%) with nearly identical realized risk (max drawdown −26.0% vs −26.6%) — the...

  12 Apr 2026 10 min ETF Analysis

• Energy Equities and Geopolitical Conflict: When the Relationship Actually Holds

  "Energy equities rise on conflict" is true on average but conditional on physical supply transmission — not on how loud the headlines are. The post-2014...

  11 Apr 2026 12 min Macro & Markets

• Top ETFs for AI Infrastructure in 2026 (Utilities, Energy, Grid)

  AI capex is increasingly an electricity story. Data-center load growth has revived a previously sleepy regulated-utility sector and pulled grid-equipment...

  10 Apr 2026 12 min ETF Analysis

• Energy ETFs in the 2026 Hormuz Shock: When Geopolitical Risk Premia Show Up in Returns

  XLE delivered a 22.3% five-year CAGR, but most of that compounded off the 2020 trough; the realized 10-year CAGR of 10.7% is a more honest through-cycle...

  07 Mar 2026 10 min Macro & Markets

• XLE vs VDE: A Five-Year Audit of the Two Largest US Energy ETFs

  XLE and VDE delivered nearly identical 5-year CAGR (22.3% vs 22.6%) at nearly identical volatility — the diversification VDE offers on paper barely...

  07 Mar 2026 9 min ETF Analysis