FTXG vs VYM
First Trust Nasdaq Food & Beverage ETF vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Which is better, FTXG or VYM?
Mid Cap Value against Large Cap Value.
VYM has a lower expense ratio. VYM led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. VYM is less concentrated, with 25.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 62.4%.
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 | FTXG | VYM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.60% | 0.04%Best |
| AUM | $19M | $81.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 2.52% | 2.24% |
| Holdings | 62 | 613 |
| YTD Return | +11.12% | +15.29%Best |
| 1Y Return | +6.18% | +22.23%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +0.71% | +18.81%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +1.31% | +12.14%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.2%Best | 14.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -33.8%Best | -35.7% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $10,672 | $17,734Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 62.4% | 25.9%Best |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Sep 20, 2016 | Nov 10, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 10, 2016 to Sep 3, 2026 (9.9 years).
FTXG 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 9.9 years both funds cover.
FTXG vs VYM Performance
First Trust Nasdaq Food & Beverage ETF (FTXG) 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 FTXG returned +6.18% while VYM returned +22.23%. Year to date, FTXG is up 11.12% versus a gain of 15.29% for VYM.
Over three years, FTXG compounded at +0.71% per year against +18.81% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +1.31% and +12.14% respectively. Across the full 10-year window we track, VYM has the edge at +10.51% annualized vs +2.85%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VYM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.3% compared with 14.2% for FTXG. 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 -33.8% for FTXG 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 0.74. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FTXG charges 0.60% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $60 vs $4 annually, a gap of $56 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FTXG currently yields 2.52% against 2.24% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
75.5% of FTXG's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 3.3% of VYM's money is in holdings FTXG also owns.
Most of FTXG is already inside VYM. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
17 positions in common, counted across the 30 positions we hold weights for in FTXG and 603 in VYM, against full books of 62 and 613.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 553 positions for VYM that do not appear in our book for FTXG (94.1% of the fund), and 12 for FTXG that do not appear in VYM (22.5%).
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 FTXG | Weight in VYM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| KOCoca Cola Co. | 8.84% | 1.31% | 7.53% |
| ADMArcher-Daniels-Midland Co. | 9.33% | 0.15% | 9.18% |
| KHCKraft Heinz Co. | 8.68% | 0.08% | 8.60% |
| MDLZMondelez International Inc Com A Npv | 8.44% | 0.31% | 8.13% |
| PEPPepsico Inc. | 6.79% | 0.77% | 6.02% |
| KDPKeurig Dr Pepper Inc (kdp Us) | 4.22% | 0.18% | 4.04% |
| TSNTyson Foods Inc. Class A | 3.72% | 0.07% | 3.65% |
| CALMCal-maine Foods Inc | 3.62% | 0.01% | 3.61% |
| STZConstellation Brands Inc Common Stock Usd 0.01 | 3.44% | 0.08% | 3.36% |
| GISGeneral Mills In | 3.30% | 0.08% | 3.22% |
75.5% of FTXG 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, FTXG or VYM?
FTXG has an expense ratio of 0.60% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option, by $56 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FTXG or VYM?
Over the past year FTXG returned +6.18% vs +22.23% for VYM, so VYM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (10 years), FTXG annualized +2.85% vs +10.51% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FTXG or VYM?
VYM has been the more volatile fund at 14.3% annualized versus 14.2% for FTXG. Worst drawdown: FTXG -33.8% vs VYM -35.7%.
Should I hold both FTXG and VYM?
FTXG and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.74, 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 FTXG and VYM?
75.5% of FTXG's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 3.3% of VYM's is in holdings FTXG also owns. They hold 17 positions in common, counted across the 30 positions we hold weights for in FTXG and 603 in VYM.
Which pays a higher dividend, FTXG or VYM?
FTXG yields 2.52% while VYM yields 2.24%, so FTXG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VYM better than FTXG?
VYM has a lower expense ratio. VYM led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. VYM is less concentrated, with 25.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 62.4%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.