FCTR vs VYM
First Trust Lunt US Factor Rotation ETF vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Which is better, FCTR or VYM?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Value.
VYM has a lower expense ratio. VYM led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. FCTR is less concentrated, with 15.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 25.9%.
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
| Metric | FCTR | VYM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.65% | 0.04%Best |
| AUM | $57M | $81.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.50% | 2.24% |
| Holdings | 331 | 613 |
| YTD Return | +11.17% | +14.82%Best |
| 1Y Return | +18.23% | +20.84%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +16.31% | +18.64%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +2.91% | +12.28%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.9% | 15.3%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -37.1% | -35.7%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $11,542 | $17,845Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 15.9%Best | 25.9% |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Jul 23, 2018 | Nov 10, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 26, 2018 to Sep 4, 2026 (8.1 years).
FCTR 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 covers the 8.1 years both funds cover.
FCTR vs VYM Performance
First Trust Lunt US Factor Rotation ETF (FCTR) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year FCTR returned +18.23% while VYM returned +20.84%. Year to date, FCTR is up 11.17% versus a gain of 14.82% for VYM.
Over three years, FCTR compounded at +16.31% per year against +18.64% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +2.91% and +12.28% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, VYM has the edge at +10.44% annualized vs +9.68%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FCTR has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.9% compared with 15.3% 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 -37.1% for FCTR and -35.7% 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 0.80. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FCTR charges 0.65% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $65 vs $4 annually, a gap of $61 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FCTR currently yields 0.50% against 2.24% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
47.0% of FCTR's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 36.3% of VYM's money is in holdings FCTR also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
82 positions in common, counted across the 167 positions we hold weights for in FCTR and 603 in VYM, against full books of 331 and 613.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 488 positions for VYM that do not appear in our book for FCTR (61.1% of the fund), and 82 for FCTR that do not appear in VYM (51.9%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in FCTR | Weight in VYM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| JPMJpmorgan Chase | 0.48% | 3.38% | 2.90% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 1.16% | 2.54% | 1.38% |
| XOMExxon Mobil Corp. | 0.34% | 2.36% | 2.02% |
| KOCoca Cola Co. | 1.24% | 1.31% | 0.07% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 0.34% | 1.93% | 1.59% |
| UNHUnitedhealth Group Incorporated | 0.49% | 1.56% | 1.07% |
| ALLAllstate Corp. | 1.70% | 0.25% | 1.45% |
| PMPhilip Morris International Inc. | 0.60% | 1.17% | 0.57% |
| TRVThe Travelers Cos, Inc. | 1.45% | 0.29% | 1.16% |
| BKBank Of New York Mellon Corp | 1.33% | 0.41% | 0.92% |
47.0% of FCTR is already inside VYM.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FCTR or VYM?
FCTR has an expense ratio of 0.65% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option, by $61 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FCTR or VYM?
Over the past year FCTR returned +18.23% vs +20.84% for VYM, so VYM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), FCTR annualized +9.68% vs +10.44% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FCTR or VYM?
FCTR has been the more volatile fund at 19.9% annualized versus 15.3% for VYM. Worst drawdown: FCTR -37.1% vs VYM -35.7%.
Should I hold both FCTR and VYM?
FCTR and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.80, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between FCTR and VYM?
47.0% of FCTR's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 36.3% of VYM's is in holdings FCTR also owns. They hold 82 positions in common, counted across the 167 positions we hold weights for in FCTR and 603 in VYM.
Which pays a higher dividend, FCTR or VYM?
FCTR yields 0.50% while VYM yields 2.24%, so VYM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VYM better than FCTR?
VYM has a lower expense ratio. VYM led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. FCTR is less concentrated, with 15.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 25.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.