GENZ ranks 4th and LOGO 6th of 10 funds in the Consumer Lifestyle Category.
GENZ vs LOGO
GENZ −0.18pt a year
0.51%0.69%
LOGO 1.7×the volume
1.38K2.35K
GENZ vs LOGO Performance
−9.1%−7.6%
- GENZ 0.51%, better
- LOGO 0.69%
- GENZ $15M
- LOGO $32M
- GENZ −9.1%
- LOGO −7.6%, better
- GENZ 3.78%
- LOGO
- GENZ 42
- LOGO 46
- GENZ 1.38K sh
- LOGO 2.35K sh, better
- GENZ $35.62
- LOGO $19.89
ETF.net Grade
| Pillar | GENZ | LOGO |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | B55Higher | F12 |
| Mission | ||
| Risk | D26 | C43Higher |
| Tradability | D39 | B66Higher |
| Holdings | D38 | A84Higher |
| Durability | A70Higher | C54 |
Rank among Consumer Lifestyle funds
Same Category. GENZ and LOGO are both graded against the same 10 Consumer Lifestyle funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
Our read on each fund
GENZC
LOGOC
In short
GENZ Longevity is rare in thematics: GENZ dates back to 2008 and today tracks the MarketVector Digital Native Economy Index, roughly 40 US stocks, for 0.51% a year, below its peer group's median fee.
LOGO Most consumer-theme funds ride the upswing and wear the downswing. LOGO writes both sides into its objective: long-term capital appreciation, plus an aim to preserve capital when conditions turn adverse. A young, focused take on where people spend.
Stated mandate
GENZ GENZ seeks to replicate the MarketVector Digital Native Economy Index before fees and expenses. It uses a passive approach and normally invests at least 80% of assets in securities comprising that index.
LOGO The Fund seeks long-term capital appreciation and also seeks to preserve capital during adverse market conditions.
Why people hold it
Worth knowing
GENZ vs LOGO Holdings
How we measure overlap
Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.
GENZ vs LOGO Cost
Overpaying LOGO vs GENZ
$3,264
On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.
GENZ 0.51%
$10,165
LOGO 0.69%
$13,429
Cost over time
Year by year
| Year | GENZ | LOGO | Overpaying |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | $918 | $1,232 | $314 |
| 20 | $3,527 | $4,697 | $1,170 |
| 30 | $10,165 | $13,429 | $3,264 |
- 0.51%GENZ, cheaper
- 0.69%LOGO
- Middle half of Consumer Lifestyle funds
- Median 0.54%
GENZ 5th cheapest of 10 funds
LOGO 9th cheapest of 10 funds
GENZ vs LOGO Dividends
- GENZ 3.78%
- LOGO
- GENZ $1.36
- LOGO None
- GENZ $1.36
- LOGO
- GENZ Dec 22, 2025
- LOGO
- GENZ Dec 26, 2025
- LOGO
- GENZ Annual
- LOGO
Distribution history
GENZ vs LOGO Risk
Fall from peak · 5 years
Risk facts
- Volatility
- GENZ 18.2%LOGO 12.4%
- Return per unit of risk
- GENZ −0.12LOGO −0.29
- Worst fall
- GENZ −36.0%LOGO −18.4%
- Market sensitivity
- GENZ 0.96LOGO 0.96Same figure. Both funds show the same value, so neither comes out ahead.
Popular comparisons
- 0.51% · 0.50%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.69% · 0.50%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.51% · 0.58%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.69% · 0.58%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.51% · 0.50%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
- 0.69% · 0.50%
- Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.