BedrockCalc — bedrockcalc.com
Scenario link:
ETF Fee Comparison Calculator
A fraction of a percent in fees compounds into real money over decades. This ETF fee comparison calculator puts two expense ratios side by side and charts the wealth gap they open over your horizon — headline number, fee-drag chart and schedule updating with every slider.
See how this works on a $10,000 portfolio — 3 real examples
In basis points: Fund A is 3 bps, Fund B is 75 bps. Per $10,000 invested, that is about $3 vs $75 a year — before any compounding.
Wealth gap after 30 years
$0
The cheaper fund keeps more of your money.
Fund A ends at (0.03%)
$0
Fund B ends at (0.75%)
$0
Fund A fees paid
$0
Fund B fees paid
$0
Break-even: the pricier fund must beat the cheaper one every year to justify its cost.
Where each fund's gross growth ends up
Both funds start from the same fee-free growth. Press a button below to extend each bar out to that shared figure — the gap is what the expense ratio quietly costs.
Fund A 0.03%
- — Fund A leaves you with
- — Fund A's expense ratio costs you
Both bars are drawn to the same fee-free total, so both extend to the same right edge — that shared edge is the growth each fund starts from. The only difference between the funds is how far short of it they stop.
Fund B 0.75%
- — Fund B leaves you with
- — Fund B's expense ratio costs you
Extend both and compare the two gaps: same right edge, different distance to it. Neither solid bar moves — nothing was removed from either balance.
Cumulative dollars lost to fees
Year-by-year fee dragBoth fund values plus cumulative fees, every year
| Year | Fund A value | Fund B value | Fund A fees | Fund B fees | Wealth gap |
|---|
How the expense-ratio impact is calculated
Both funds are grown from the same inputs, but each fund’s expense ratio is subtracted from the gross return before compounding. The final value of each fund is:
FV = P (1 + net/m)m·t + contributions, net = return − expense ratio
Fund A grows at return − ERA and Fund B at return − ERB, with monthly contributions compounded at the exact effective monthly rate. The headline wealth gap is simply FVA − FVB over your horizon. Each fund’s fees paid is its fee drag — the difference between a hypothetical fee-free balance (grown at the full gross return) and its actual net balance.
The break-even outperformance is exactly the difference in expense ratios (ERB − ERA). Because a fund’s final value rises steadily as its net return rises, the extra gross return the pricier fund must earn to match the cheaper one is precisely the fee gap — no more, no less. A basis point is one-hundredth of a percent, so a 0.75% ratio is 75 basis points, or about $75 a year per $10,000 before compounding. This is an educational model of fee impact, not investment advice, and it assumes both funds earn the same gross return.
Same money, same market, three price tags
Two funds get identical treatment — $10,000 up front, $500 a month, 7% a year for 30 years — and the only thing that moves is fund B's fee.
The half-point fund: 0.50% vs 0.03%
cheaper fund ahead by$63,822
- Over 30 years the half-point fee collects $68,143; fund A's 0.03% collects $4,322.
- Fund B ends the run at $623,007; the identical deposits in fund A reach $686,829.
- Tying A would take an extra 0.47% of return from B's manager, every year of the thirty.
Half a percent sounds like rounding error; over thirty years it is $63,822 of ending money.
Load this example (opens in a new tab)The middle case: 0.75% vs 0.03%
cheaper fund ahead by$94,977
- At 0.75%, the fee bill grows to $99,299 — about 23 times what fund A gives up.
- That leaves B at $591,852, a full $94,977 behind a fund doing the very same job.
- Drawing level again asks B's manager to out-earn A by 0.72% a year, thirty years running.
The 0.75% fund hands over $99,299 — nearly ten times the deposit that opened the account.
Load this example (opens in a new tab)The full point: 1.00% vs 0.03%
cheaper fund ahead by$124,346
- One percent a year compounds into $128,667 of fees — nearly thirty times fund A's $4,322.
- B finishes at $562,483 against A's $686,829 — the fee money, and everything it would have earned, gone.
- Justifying that price means beating A by 0.97% every year for thirty years — and that only buys a tie.
A single point of fee erases roughly a fifth of the whole pot; A's fee erased $4,322.
Load this example (opens in a new tab)Illustrations only, not financial advice. Your own rate, taxes and insurance will differ — check with a qualified financial advisor before acting on any of this.
Why a fraction of a percent costs a fortune
- ▸Fees compound against you. The same math that grows your balance also grows the dollars an expense ratio skims — the gap between two funds widens every single year.
- ▸Basis points are real dollars. 50 basis points sounds trivial, but on a six-figure balance it is hundreds of dollars a year, automatically, whether the fund beats the market or not.
- ▸The break-even bar is high. A pricier fund has to out-earn a cheaper one by the full fee gap every year just to tie — a hurdle most funds fail to clear over the long run.
- ▸Fees are the variable you control. Returns are uncertain; the expense ratio is a known, guaranteed drag you can shrink today by choosing the cheaper fund.
- ▸It is one input, not the verdict. Also weigh tracking quality, liquidity and the bid-ask spread — but on a long horizon, the fee gap is usually the biggest lever.
Related calculators
Frequently asked questions
What is an expense ratio?
An expense ratio is the annual percentage of your invested assets that an ETF or index fund charges to cover management and operating costs. It is deducted automatically from the fund’s assets every day, so you never see a bill — it just quietly lowers your return. This expense ratio calculator shows exactly how much that silent deduction adds up to over time.
Does a 0.1% fee difference really matter?
More than most people expect, because the fee compounds against your whole balance every year for decades. On a $10,000 start with $500 invested monthly at 7% over 30 years, shifting the expense ratio by just 0.10% costs several thousand dollars. Widen the gap to 0.75% versus 0.03% and the expense-ratio impact runs well into five figures.
What does an expense ratio of 0.5% mean in dollars?
A 0.5% expense ratio means you pay $5 per year for every $1,000 invested — 50 basis points. On a $50,000 balance that is $250 a year, and it scales up automatically as your balance grows. The basis-points-to-dollars line under the fee inputs translates any ratio you enter into a plain yearly cost per $10,000.
Is the cheapest ETF always the best choice?
A lower expense ratio is a durable, guaranteed head start, but it is not the only factor. You should also weigh how tightly the fund tracks its index, its liquidity and bid-ask spread, and its after-fee performance. Fees are the one variable you control with certainty, which is why this etf comparison calculator focuses on them — but treat the result as one input, not the whole decision.
How much extra return must a higher-fee fund earn to be worth it?
Exactly the difference in expense ratios, every single year. If one fund charges 0.75% and another 0.03%, the pricier fund must beat the cheaper one by 0.72% in gross return annually just to break even. The calculator’s break-even output shows this figure directly — and consistently clearing that hurdle is rare.
What is the difference between an ETF and a mutual fund expense ratio?
They measure the same thing: the annual fee a fund charges as a percentage of assets. ETFs are often cheaper than comparable actively managed mutual funds, though ETFs can add small trading costs like the bid-ask spread. This tool compares any two expense ratios head-to-head, so you can use it for ETF-vs-ETF, fund-vs-fund, or ETF-vs-mutual-fund fee comparisons.
Disclaimer: these calculators are educational tools, not financial advice. They model your inputs with published formulas, but they cannot know your full situation — for decisions with real stakes, talk to a qualified professional. Formulas and defaults last reviewed .