CZA vs VYM
Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap 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 | CZA | VYM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.69% | 0.04% | |
| AUM | $189M | $79.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.41% | 2.86% | |
| Holdings | 104 | 568 | |
| YTD Return | +13.90% | +16.10% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.93% | +25.99% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +13.64% | +18.29% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.62% | +12.35% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.6% | 14.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -53.2% | -58.8% | |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Apr 2, 2007 | Nov 10, 2006 |
CZA vs VYM Performance
Invesco Zacks Mid-Cap ETF (CZA) is a ETF from Invesco (US) and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year CZA returned +21.93% while VYM returned +25.99%. Year to date, CZA is up 13.90% versus a gain of 16.10% for VYM.
Over three years, CZA compounded at +13.64% per year against +18.29% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +7.62% and +12.35% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, CZA has the edge at +9.76% annualized vs +7.08%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
CZA has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.6% 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 -53.2% for CZA 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 0.88. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CZA charges 0.69% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $69 vs $4 annually, a gap of $65 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CZA currently yields 1.41% against 2.86% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
CZA and VYM share 32 holdings out of 628 unique holdings combined, representing a 2.9% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CZA or VYM?
CZA has an expense ratio of 0.69% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $65 per year of difference.
Which performed better, CZA or VYM?
Over the past year CZA returned +21.93% vs +25.99% for VYM, so VYM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), CZA annualized +9.76% vs +7.08% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, CZA or VYM?
CZA has been the more volatile fund at 16.6% annualized versus 14.6% for VYM. Worst drawdown: CZA -53.2% vs VYM -58.8%.
Should I hold both CZA and VYM?
CZA and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.88, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between CZA and VYM?
CZA and VYM share 32 common holdings with a 2.9% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 628 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, CZA or VYM?
CZA yields 1.41% 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.