COZX vs VYM

COZX vs VYM

Which is better, COZX or VYM?

Trading-Leveraged Equity against Large Cap Value.

VYM has a lower expense ratio. VYM led over 1Y and the full window.

Lower Fees: VYMHigher Returns: VYM

MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.

Side-by-Side Comparison

MetricCOZXVYM
Expense Ratio1.30%0.04%Best
AUM$2M$95.8B
Dividend Yield0.00%2.23%
Holdings8610
YTD Return-57.35%+16.00%Best
1Y Return-67.09%+18.97%Best
3Y Return (annualized)-+20.46%
5Y Return (annualized)-+11.54%
Volatility (annualized)147.1%11.8%Best
Max Drawdown-89.7%-6.7%Best
$10,000 over 1 years$1,993$12,046Best
Fund FamilyTradr ETFsVanguard (US)
CategoryAlternativeEquity
StyleTrading-Leveraged EquityLarge Cap Value
InceptionNov 4, 2025Nov 10, 2006

Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.

Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 5, 2025 to Nov 11, 2026 (1 years).

COZX vs VYM growth

Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.

COZX vs VYM Performance

Tradr 2X Long CORZ Daily ETF (COZX) is an ETF from Tradr ETFs and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year COZX returned -67.09% while VYM returned +18.97%. Year to date, COZX is down 57.35% versus a gain of 16.00% for VYM.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns

COZX has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 147.1% compared with 11.8% 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 -89.7% for COZX and -6.7% for VYM. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.

The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.33. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.

Fees and Cost Over Time

COZX charges 1.30% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $130 vs $4 annually, a gap of $126 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, COZX currently yields 0.00% against 2.23% for VYM.

You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.

Whichever of COZX and VYM you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.

COZXVYM

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, COZX or VYM?

COZX has an expense ratio of 1.30% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option, by $126 a year on a $10,000 investment.

Which performed better, COZX or VYM?

Over the past year COZX returned -67.09% vs +18.97% for VYM, so VYM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (1 years), COZX annualized -80.07% vs +20.46% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which is riskier, COZX or VYM?

COZX has been the more volatile fund at 147.1% annualized versus 11.8% for VYM. Worst drawdown: COZX -89.7% vs VYM -6.7%.

Should I hold both COZX and VYM?

COZX and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.33, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which pays a higher dividend, COZX or VYM?

COZX yields 0.00% while VYM yields 2.23%, so VYM currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is VYM better than COZX?

VYM has a lower expense ratio. VYM led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.