GOLS vs VYM

GOLS vs VYM

Which is better, GOLS or VYM?

Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Value.

GOLS has a lower expense ratio. VYM is less concentrated, with 25.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 59.0%.

Lower Fees: GOLSLess Concentrated: 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

MetricGOLSVYM
Expense Ratio0.00%Best0.04%
AUM$35M$81.6B
Dividend Yield0.00%2.22%
Holdings48613
YTD Return+4.74%+13.91%Best
1Y Return-+17.57%
3Y Return (annualized)-+18.12%
5Y Return (annualized)-+12.17%
Top 10 Weight59.0%25.9%Best
Fund FamilyGabelli FundsVanguard (US)
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap BlendLarge Cap Value
InceptionJan 2, 2026Nov 10, 2006

Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.

GOLS 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.

GOLS vs VYM Performance

Gabelli Opportunities in Live and Sports ETF (GOLS) is an ETF from Gabelli Funds and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Year to date, GOLS is up 4.74% versus a gain of 13.91% for VYM.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Fees and Cost Over Time

GOLS charges 0.00% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $0 vs $4 annually, a gap of $4 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GOLS currently yields 0.00% against 2.22% for VYM.

Holdings Overlap

GOLS already in VYM6.8%
VYM already in GOLS0.6%

6.8% of GOLS's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 0.6% of VYM's money is in holdings GOLS also owns.

GOLS and VYM share little of their money.

The two holdings books were reported 50 days apart, GOLS as of Aug 19, 2026 and VYM as of Jun 30, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.

4 positions in common, counted across the 42 positions we hold weights for in GOLS and 603 in VYM, against full books of 48 and 613.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 564 positions for VYM that do not appear in our book for GOLS (96.9% of the fund), and 16 for GOLS that do not appear in VYM (66.3%).

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

StockWeight in GOLSWeight in VYMDifference
NXSTNexstar Media Group Inc2.56%0.02%2.54%
FOXFox Corp. Class B2.30%0.03%2.27%
CMCSAComcast Corp. Class A1.16%0.36%0.80%
NKENike Inc0.78%0.20%0.58%

You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.

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

GOLSVYM

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, GOLS or VYM?

GOLS has an expense ratio of 0.00% while VYM charges 0.04%. GOLS is the cheaper option, by $4 a year on a $10,000 investment.

What is the holdings overlap between GOLS and VYM?

6.8% of GOLS's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 0.6% of VYM's is in holdings GOLS also owns. They hold 4 positions in common, counted across the 42 positions we hold weights for in GOLS and 603 in VYM.

Which pays a higher dividend, GOLS or VYM?

GOLS yields 0.00% while VYM yields 2.22%, so VYM currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is VYM better than GOLS?

GOLS has a lower expense ratio. VYM is less concentrated, with 25.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 59.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.