VTV 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.

VTV's largest investment is Micron Tech at 4.87% of net assets. Jpmorgan Chase and Berkshire Hath-b follow; the three together are 10.87%. Ten companies are 23.55% of the fund; the other 307 share the rest. Among the 721 equity funds measured here, VTV behaves like 97 holdings against a median of 42.4 — 2.3 times the median. Across 28 quarterly filings VTV has held roughly steady since 2019-09-30 (97.6 then, 97 now). Between the 2026-03-31 and 2026-06-30 filings 13 positions were added and 16 dropped; 10.3% 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 2019-09-30 and 2026-06-30, VTV went from behaving like 97.6 equally weighted positions to 97 — 1% fewer, while its top ten went from 22.75% to 23.55% 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 317 positions in VTV's Form N-PORT, weight as a share of net assets, securities-lending collateral excluded. Every position, every quarter: VTV.csv.gz.

Monthly total returns from Item B.5 of VTV's own filings, 84 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 84 months, which is roughly the distributions. Every month with the filing it came from: VTV.json · all funds.

The fund lends its holdings, and Item B.4.a of the filing names every firm holding them. At 2026-06-30, $26m was out to 5 borrowers, 0.01% of net assets. The largest, NOMURA SECURITIES INTERNATIONAL INC., held 46.5% of it.

Cash collateral reported against the loan: 0.01% of net assets, 98.2% 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 VTV has filed, with each borrower: VTV.json · all funds.

313 positions became 310: 13 added (1.9% of the fund at the later date), 16 dropped (1.8% at the earlier date). Half the sum of all weight changes, a turnover proxy: 10.3%. Positions are matched on identifiers, so a security whose identifier changed shows as one drop and one add. Every filing of VTV compared this way, as a feed: changes.xml · all funds: filings received.

New: Uber Technologies Inc (0.27%), Honeywell International Inc (0.26%), Honeywell Aerospace Inc (0.26%), Stryker Corp (0.20%), Adobe Inc (0.15%), Sherwin-Williams Co/The (0.15%). Gone: Honeywell International Inc (0.59%), Applied Materials Inc (0.55%), Western Digital Corp (0.19%), Carnival Corp (0.12%), Coterra Energy Inc (0.10%), Leidos Holdings Inc (0.04%).

99.23% equity, 0.77% 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 $254.48B. Notional of an interest-rate or currency swap is not equity exposure.

Financing leg as filed: the fund pays OBFR01 + 0% on $1.23B 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 VTV (97). Same filings, same arithmetic. Position in this list says nothing about which fund is better.

• 003 Expense ratio
• 003 Duration
• 003 Factor exposure

The same filings read aloud in under a minute. Links open YouTube; nothing from it loads on this page.

• VTV vs XLK: owning both is less diversified than VTV alone (13% overlap) 2026-10-07
• QQQ vs VTV: owning both is less diversified than VTV alone (20% overlap) 2026-09-29

• Is Value 'Cheap'? Reading the Value Spread Instead of Guessing the Factor's Comeback

  A wide value spread tells you the price of the value trade, not its timing — it raises the odds without dating them. Over the last five years VTV and VUG...

  21 Aug 2026 10 min Macro & Markets

• VTV vs VUG: The Value-vs-Growth Split Inside the S&P 500 — What 15 Years of Data Show

  Over the trailing decade VUG compounded faster (18.1% vs 12.6% 10Y CAGR), but it did so with roughly double the realized volatility and a drawdown more than...

  16 Jul 2026 10 min ETF Analysis

• Why "Factor Investing" Still Works: Applying Fama-French Models in the AI Era

  The Fama-French factors weren't a trading edge that AI could arbitrage away — they were compensation for risks investors still won't bear cheerfully, plus...

  23 Apr 2026 10 min Macro & Markets