Growth vs Value Investing — Definitions, Historical Performance, and How to Allocate Your Portfolio
9 min read
Share:
Key Takeaways
Growth stocks (VOOG, P/E 32.38) trade at a 36% premium to value stocks (VOOV, P/E 23.87) — the widest gap in years, reflecting growth's recent dominance and potentially setting up value for mean reversion.
Over the past century, value stocks have outperformed growth by approximately 3-4% annually, but growth has led for the past 15 years — proving that style premiums are cyclical and require patience to capture.
Interest rates are the key driver of growth-value rotation: rate cuts favor growth (cheaper discounting of future earnings), while rate hikes favor value (shorter-duration, higher-yielding stocks).
The safest approach for most investors is owning the total market via VTI ($338.77) — which allocates between growth and value automatically — rather than concentrating in either style.
If you tilt toward a specific style, keep it modest (60/40 at most) — the risk of extended underperformance from style concentration far outweighs the potential benefit of correctly timing a style rotation.
The growth versus value debate is one of investing's most enduring questions. Growth investors chase companies with rapidly expanding revenues and earnings — think technology giants — while value investors seek stocks trading below their intrinsic worth. In February 2026, the contrast is stark: the Vanguard S&P 500 Growth ETF (VOOG) trades at a P/E of 32.38, while the Vanguard S&P 500 Value ETF (VOOV) trades at just 23.87 — a 36% valuation premium for growth stocks.
This valuation gap reflects growth's recent dominance. Technology and AI-driven companies have powered the Nasdaq 100 (QQQ at $607.29, P/E 32.65) to extraordinary returns, leaving value-oriented sectors like financials, energy, and utilities seemingly in the dust. But historical data tells a more nuanced story — value has outperformed growth over most long-term periods, and mean reversion has a way of humbling concentrated bets.
This guide explains what growth and value investing actually mean, examines their historical performance record, and provides a practical framework for allocating between the two styles.
Defining Growth and Value — What the Labels Actually Mean
The Historical Performance Record — A Century of Data
Growth vs Value — Current P/E Ratios
Why Value and Growth Perform Differently in Different Environments
Portfolio Allocation — How Much Growth and Value Should You Own?
Practical Implementation — ETFs and Funds for Growth and Value
Conclusion
The growth vs value debate generates more heat than light in the financial media. The reality is that both styles have delivered excellent long-term returns — value has a slight historical edge, but growth has dominated the past 15 years. The difference between growth and value returns is far smaller than the difference between being invested and sitting in cash.
With the growth-value P/E spread at 8.51 points (VOOG at 32.38 vs VOOV at 23.87), the current environment arguably favors a modest value tilt. But attempting to time growth-value rotations is nearly as difficult as timing the overall market. The most reliable strategy is owning both through a total market fund like VTI at $338.77 and letting the market allocate between styles for you.
If you do want to express a view, keep tilts modest — a 60/40 split between your preferred style and the other is more than enough. The most important decision isn't growth vs value — it's getting your money invested, keeping costs low, and staying disciplined through the inevitable cycles.
Disclaimer: This content is AI-generated for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. Consult qualified professionals before making investment decisions.
Growth and value are investment styles defined by different criteria for selecting stocks. Understanding these definitions is essential because many investors use the terms loosely.
Growth stocks are companies expected to increase revenues and earnings at rates significantly above the market average. They're characterized by high price-to-earnings ratios (because investors pay a premium for future growth), low or no dividends (because profits are reinvested in expansion), and high price-to-book ratios. The S&P 500 Growth Index (tracked by VOOG at $431.28) selects stocks based on three-year earnings growth, three-year sales growth, and 12-month price momentum.
Value stocks are companies trading at prices below their fundamental worth based on metrics like earnings, book value, dividends, or cash flow. They're characterized by low P/E ratios, higher dividend yields, and low price-to-book ratios. The S&P 500 Value Index (tracked by VOOV at $214.75) selects stocks based on book-value-to-price ratio, earnings-to-price ratio, and sales-to-price ratio.
The overlap zone: Many stocks fall between pure growth and pure value. A company like Apple has growth characteristics (revenue growth, innovation pipeline) but also value characteristics (reasonable P/E, massive cash generation, dividend payments). Index providers use scoring systems to classify stocks, and some appear in both growth and value indexes at partial weights.
It's worth noting that growth and value are not permanent labels. Amazon was a pure growth stock for decades — now, with $500+ billion in annual revenue and consistent profitability, it increasingly shows value characteristics. Conversely, companies that were once value plays can become growth stories when their industries are disrupted.
The historical data on growth vs value performance tells a clear but often misunderstood story.
Over the very long term (1926-2025), value has outperformed growth. The Fama-French research database shows that small-cap value stocks returned approximately 13.5% annually versus 9.5% for large-cap growth over this period. This "value premium" of 3-4% annually is one of the most robust findings in financial economics.
However, the past 15 years have been growth's golden era. Since 2010, US large-cap growth has dramatically outperformed value, driven by the dominance of technology companies. The FAANG stocks (now the "Magnificent Seven" — Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Nvidia, Tesla) have delivered returns that dwarf the broader market, pulling the growth indexes to extraordinary levels.
Mean reversion is real but unpredictable. Value dramatically outperformed growth from 2000-2007 after the dot-com bubble burst. Growth dominated 2007-2020. Value surged again in 2021-2022 as rising interest rates punished high-duration growth stocks. Growth reclaimed leadership in 2023-2025 driven by AI enthusiasm. These regime shifts are impossible to predict in advance.
The key insight: Both styles have extended periods of outperformance and underperformance. Investors who concentrate in one style risk decades of underperformance relative to a balanced approach.
Growth and value stocks respond differently to economic and monetary conditions, which explains the cyclical nature of their relative performance.
Interest rates are the critical variable. Growth stocks derive most of their value from future earnings — cash flows expected 5, 10, or 20 years from now. When interest rates rise, those future cash flows are discounted more heavily, reducing present values. The Fed's rate hiking cycle from 2022-2024 (from 0% to 5.33%) severely punished growth stocks. Now, with the Fed cutting rates to 3.64% and expected to continue easing, growth stocks have regained their advantage as future earnings become more valuable in present-value terms.
Economic cycles favor different styles. Early in an economic recovery, value stocks — especially financials, industrials, and energy companies — tend to outperform as cyclical earnings rebound from depressed levels. As the expansion matures and growth becomes scarcer, investors pay premium prices for the few companies still growing rapidly, favoring growth stocks. In recessions, it varies: defensive value (utilities, consumer staples) outperforms, but high-quality growth (dominant tech platforms) also holds up well.
Inflation tilts the playing field. High inflation benefits value sectors like energy, materials, and financials (which earn more as rates rise). Low inflation and disinflation favor growth stocks, whose long-duration cash flows benefit from lower discount rates. With CPI showing inflation around 2.1% annualized, the current environment is relatively neutral.
The 10-year Treasury yield at 4.02% provides important context. When risk-free rates are this high, investors demand higher expected returns from stocks. Growth stocks, priced at 32.38 times earnings (VOOG), need to deliver substantially higher earnings growth to justify their premium over value stocks at 23.87 times earnings (VOOV). If growth doesn't materialize, multiple compression could erode growth stock prices even as earnings grow.
The optimal growth-value allocation depends on your time horizon, risk tolerance, and market views. Here are three approaches.
Approach 1: Market-weight (own both). The simplest strategy is to own the total market through VTI ($338.77, P/E 26.83) or the S&P 500 through VOO ($631.04, P/E 27.66), which already contains both growth and value stocks in market-cap proportions. This is the default recommendation for most investors because it ensures you always own whatever style is winning without needing to predict regime changes. The current S&P 500 is approximately 55% growth-oriented and 45% value-oriented by weight.
Approach 2: Strategic tilt toward value. Given the 100-year evidence of a value premium, some investors deliberately overweight value stocks. A portfolio of 40% VTI + 20% VOOV (or a dedicated value fund like VTV) tilts toward value while maintaining broad market exposure. This approach accepts potential short-term underperformance during growth rallies in exchange for higher expected long-term returns. With VOOV at a 23.87 P/E vs VOOG at 32.38, the valuation gap suggests value has more room for multiple expansion.
Approach 3: Dynamic allocation based on valuation spreads. More sophisticated investors monitor the valuation gap between growth and value. When the spread is historically wide (growth is very expensive relative to value), they tilt toward value. When the spread narrows, they move back to market weight. Currently, the growth-value P/E spread of 8.51 points (32.38 minus 23.87) is above the historical median, suggesting value may be more attractively positioned.
Regardless of approach, avoid the extremes: going 100% growth or 100% value concentrates your portfolio in a single style factor, exposing you to extended periods of underperformance. Even a modest allocation to both styles dramatically reduces this style-concentration risk.
If you want to express a growth or value tilt in your portfolio, here are the most efficient vehicles.
For growth exposure: The Vanguard S&P 500 Growth ETF (VOOG at $431.28, 0.10% expense ratio) tracks the growth half of the S&P 500. The Invesco QQQ (QQQ at $607.29, 0.20% expense ratio) provides concentrated exposure to the 100 largest Nasdaq companies, which skew heavily toward technology and growth. For broader growth including mid-caps, the Vanguard Growth ETF (VUG) covers more names.
For value exposure: The Vanguard S&P 500 Value ETF (VOOV at $214.75, 0.10% expense ratio) captures the value half of the S&P 500. For small-cap value — the historically richest return premium — the Vanguard Small-Cap Value ETF (VBR) and the iShares Russell 2000 Value ETF (IWN) provide exposure. The Russell 2000 (IWM at $261.41, P/E 18.86) already has a natural value tilt relative to the S&P 500.
For a balanced approach: VTI ($338.77) owns the entire US market — all styles, all sizes — at just 0.03%. Add VXUS for international exposure and BND ($75.17) for bonds, and you have a complete, style-neutral portfolio with three funds. This is the approach most investment advisors and financial planners actually recommend, even while the financial media obsesses over the growth-value debate.
One underappreciated strategy: dividend growth investing sits at the intersection of growth and value. Companies that consistently grow their dividends tend to be high-quality businesses with durable competitive advantages — they have the growth characteristics of expanding earnings and the value characteristics of reasonable valuations and cash returns to shareholders. Funds like VIG (Vanguard Dividend Appreciation) capture this sweet spot.