EFT vs VYM
Eaton Vance Floating Rate Income Trust 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 616 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | EFT | VYM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 5.35% | 0.04% | |
| AUM | $380M | $81.6B | |
| Dividend Yield | 7.92% | 2.24% | |
| Holdings | 501 | 616 | |
| YTD Return | +1.70% | +16.42% | |
| 1Y Return | -1.99% | +24.22% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +6.05% | +19.03% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +3.12% | +12.21% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.1% | 14.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -66.4% | -58.8% | |
| Fund Family | Eaton Vance | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Jun 29, 2004 | Nov 10, 2006 |
EFT vs VYM Performance
Eaton Vance Floating Rate Income Trust (EFT) is a ETF from Eaton Vance and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year EFT returned -1.99% while VYM returned +24.22%. Year to date, EFT is up 1.70% versus a gain of 16.42% for VYM.
Over three years, EFT compounded at +6.05% per year against +19.03% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +3.12% and +12.21% respectively. Across the full 20-year window we track, VYM has the edge at +7.10% annualized vs -0.56%. 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 14.1% for EFT. 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 -66.4% for EFT 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 0.55. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
EFT charges 5.35% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $535 vs $4 annually, a gap of $531 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EFT currently yields 7.92% against 2.24% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
EFT and VYM share 0 holdings out of 778 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, EFT or VYM?
EFT has an expense ratio of 5.35% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $531 per year of difference.
Which performed better, EFT or VYM?
Over the past year EFT returned -1.99% vs +24.22% for VYM, so VYM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (20 years), EFT annualized -0.56% vs +7.10% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, EFT or VYM?
VYM has been the more volatile fund at 14.6% annualized versus 14.1% for EFT. Worst drawdown: EFT -66.4% vs VYM -58.8%.
Should I hold both EFT and VYM?
EFT and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.55, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between EFT and VYM?
EFT and VYM share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 778 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, EFT or VYM?
EFT yields 7.92% while VYM yields 2.24%, so EFT 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.