BWZ vs VYM
State Street SPDR Bloomberg Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Quick Verdict
VYM has a lower expense ratio. VYM delivered stronger 1-year returns. VYM offers more diversification with 558 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BWZ | VYM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.35% | 0.04% | |
| AUM | $264M | $79.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 2.11% | 2.86% | |
| Holdings | 291 | 568 | |
| YTD Return | +0.37% | +16.78% | |
| 1Y Return | -0.44% | +24.43% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +2.85% | +18.60% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -1.41% | +12.30% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 7.4% | 14.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -37.9% | -58.8% | |
| Fund Family | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Jan 15, 2009 | Nov 10, 2006 |
BWZ vs VYM Performance
State Street SPDR Bloomberg Short Term International Treasury Bond ETF (BWZ) is a ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year BWZ returned -0.44% while VYM returned +24.43%. Year to date, BWZ is up 0.37% versus a gain of 16.78% for VYM.
Over three years, BWZ compounded at +2.85% per year against +18.60% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are -1.41% and +12.30% respectively. Across the full 18-year window we track, VYM has the edge at +7.11% annualized vs -0.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VYM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.6% compared with 7.4% for BWZ. 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 -37.9% for BWZ 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 0.47. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BWZ charges 0.35% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $35 vs $4 annually, a gap of $31 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BWZ currently yields 2.11% against 2.86% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
BWZ and VYM share 1 holdings out of 562 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in BWZ | Weight in VYM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| KR | 0.00% | 0.18% | 0.18% |
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BWZ or VYM?
BWZ has an expense ratio of 0.35% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $31 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BWZ or VYM?
Over the past year BWZ returned -0.44% vs +24.43% for VYM, so VYM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (18 years), BWZ annualized -0.66% vs +7.11% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BWZ or VYM?
VYM has been the more volatile fund at 14.6% annualized versus 7.4% for BWZ. Worst drawdown: BWZ -37.9% vs VYM -58.8%.
Should I hold both BWZ and VYM?
BWZ and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.47, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BWZ and VYM?
BWZ and VYM share 1 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 562 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BWZ or VYM?
BWZ yields 2.11% while VYM yields 2.86%, so VYM 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.