GSLC vs VYM
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta US Large Cap Equity ETF vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Which is better, GSLC or VYM?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Value.
VYM has a lower expense ratio. GSLC led over 3Y and the full window, VYM over 1Y and 5Y. VYM is less concentrated, with 26.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 30.2%.
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 | GSLC | VYM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.09% | 0.04%Best |
| AUM | $15.2B | $81.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.92% | 2.22% |
| Holdings | 438 | 613 |
| YTD Return | +9.18% | +11.71%Best |
| 1Y Return | +12.36% | +16.24%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +19.55%Best | +17.24% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.27% | +11.86%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.9% | 14.0%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -33.7%Best | -35.7% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,057 | $17,514Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 30.2% | 26.1%Best |
| Fund Family | Goldman Sachs Asset Management | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Sep 17, 2015 | Nov 10, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 21, 2015 to Sep 16, 2026 (11 years).
GSLC 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 11 years both funds cover.
GSLC vs VYM Performance
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta US Large Cap Equity ETF (GSLC) is an ETF from Goldman Sachs Asset Management and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year GSLC returned +12.36% while VYM returned +16.24%. Year to date, GSLC is up 9.18% versus a gain of 11.71% for VYM.
Over three years, GSLC compounded at +19.55% per year against +17.24% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +11.27% and +11.86% respectively. Across the full 11-year window we track, GSLC has the edge at +13.02% annualized vs +10.30%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GSLC has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.9% compared with 14.0% 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 -33.7% for GSLC 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 0.89. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GSLC charges 0.09% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $9 vs $4 annually, a gap of $5 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GSLC currently yields 0.92% against 2.22% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
35.8% of GSLC's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 61.7% of VYM's money is in holdings GSLC also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
131 positions in common, counted across the 347 positions we hold weights for in GSLC and 557 in VYM, against full books of 438 and 613.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 398 positions for VYM that do not appear in our book for GSLC (35.6% of the fund), and 209 for GSLC that do not appear in VYM (62.8%).
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 GSLC | Weight in VYM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.62% | 7.35% | 3.73% |
| JPMJpmorgan Chase | 2.05% | 3.82% | 1.77% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 1.41% | 2.51% | 1.10% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 0.80% | 1.86% | 1.06% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 0.74% | 1.80% | 1.06% |
| BACBank of America Corp.: Financials | 0.71% | 1.66% | 0.95% |
| MRKMerck & Company Inc | 0.75% | 1.31% | 0.56% |
| UNHUnitedhealth Group, Inc. | 0.54% | 1.52% | 0.98% |
| KOCoca Cola Co. | 0.58% | 1.38% | 0.80% |
| PGProcter & Gamble Company | 0.47% | 1.37% | 0.90% |
61.7% of VYM is already inside GSLC.
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, GSLC or VYM?
GSLC has an expense ratio of 0.09% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option, by $5 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, GSLC or VYM?
Over the past year GSLC returned +12.36% vs +16.24% for VYM, so VYM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (11 years), GSLC annualized +13.02% vs +10.30% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GSLC or VYM?
GSLC has been the more volatile fund at 14.9% annualized versus 14.0% for VYM. Worst drawdown: GSLC -33.7% vs VYM -35.7%.
Should I hold both GSLC and VYM?
GSLC and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.89, 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 GSLC and VYM?
61.7% of VYM's money is in holdings GSLC also owns. 61.7% of VYM's is in holdings GSLC also owns. They hold 131 positions in common, counted across the 347 positions we hold weights for in GSLC and 557 in VYM.
Which pays a higher dividend, GSLC or VYM?
GSLC yields 0.92% while VYM yields 2.22%, so VYM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VYM better than GSLC?
VYM has a lower expense ratio. GSLC led over 3Y and the full window, VYM over 1Y and 5Y. VYM is less concentrated, with 26.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 30.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.