AWF vs VYM
AllianceBernstein Global High Income Fund vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Quick Verdict
VYM has a lower expense ratio. VYM delivered stronger 1-year returns. AWF offers more diversification with 707 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | AWF | VYM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.00% | 0.04% | |
| AUM | $969M | $79.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 6.92% | 2.86% | |
| Holdings | 1,273 | 568 | |
| YTD Return | -0.83% | +16.16% | |
| 1Y Return | -2.37% | +26.05% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +8.50% | +18.43% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +3.66% | +12.21% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.2% | 14.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -60.0% | -58.8% | |
| Fund Family | AllianceBernstein L.P. | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Jul 28, 1993 | Nov 10, 2006 |
AWF vs VYM Performance
AllianceBernstein Global High Income Fund (AWF) is a ETF from AllianceBernstein L.P. and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year AWF returned -2.37% while VYM returned +26.05%. Year to date, AWF is down 0.83% versus a gain of 16.16% for VYM.
Over three years, AWF compounded at +8.50% per year against +18.43% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +3.66% and +12.21% respectively. Across the full 20-year window we track, VYM has the edge at +7.09% annualized vs +0.92%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
AWF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.2% compared with 14.6% for VYM. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -60.0% for AWF and -58.8% for VYM. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.61. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AWF charges 1.00% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $100 vs $4 annually, a gap of $96 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AWF currently yields 6.92% against 2.86% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
AWF and VYM share 0 holdings out of 1265 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, AWF or VYM?
AWF has an expense ratio of 1.00% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $96 per year of difference.
Which performed better, AWF or VYM?
Over the past year AWF returned -2.37% vs +26.05% for VYM, so VYM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (20 years), AWF annualized +0.92% vs +7.09% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, AWF or VYM?
AWF has been the more volatile fund at 18.2% annualized versus 14.6% for VYM. Worst drawdown: AWF -60.0% vs VYM -58.8%.
Should I hold both AWF and VYM?
AWF and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.61, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between AWF and VYM?
AWF and VYM share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 1265 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, AWF or VYM?
AWF yields 6.92% while VYM yields 2.86%, so AWF currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.