CGRO vs VYM
CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth 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 | CGRO | VYM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.89% | 0.04% | |
| AUM | $2M | $79.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 3.69% | 2.86% | |
| Holdings | 33 | 568 | |
| YTD Return | -15.83% | +16.10% | |
| 1Y Return | -12.12% | +25.99% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +6.66% | +18.29% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.66% | +12.35% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 62.5% | 14.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -42.1% | -58.8% | |
| Fund Family | CORE VALUES ALPHA | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Oct 16, 2023 | Nov 10, 2006 |
CGRO vs VYM Performance
CoreValues Alpha Greater China Growth ETF (CGRO) is a ETF from CORE VALUES ALPHA and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year CGRO returned -12.12% while VYM returned +25.99%. Year to date, CGRO is down 15.83% versus a gain of 16.10% for VYM.
Over three years, CGRO compounded at +6.66% per year against +18.29% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +6.66% and +12.35% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, CGRO has the edge at +15.84% annualized vs +7.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
CGRO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 62.5% 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 -42.1% for CGRO 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 -0.16. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CGRO charges 0.89% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $89 vs $4 annually, a gap of $85 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CGRO currently yields 3.69% against 2.86% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
CGRO and VYM share 0 holdings out of 589 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, CGRO or VYM?
CGRO has an expense ratio of 0.89% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $85 per year of difference.
Which performed better, CGRO or VYM?
Over the past year CGRO returned -12.12% vs +25.99% for VYM, so VYM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), CGRO annualized +15.84% vs +7.08% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, CGRO or VYM?
CGRO has been the more volatile fund at 62.5% annualized versus 14.6% for VYM. Worst drawdown: CGRO -42.1% vs VYM -58.8%.
Should I hold both CGRO and VYM?
CGRO and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of -0.16, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between CGRO and VYM?
CGRO and VYM share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 589 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, CGRO or VYM?
CGRO yields 3.69% while VYM yields 2.86%, so CGRO 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.