LCIV vs VYM
Logan Capital International ETF vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Which is better, LCIV or VYM?
VYM costs less.
VYM has a lower expense ratio. VYM is less concentrated, with 25.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 30.3%.
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 | LCIV | VYM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.99% | 0.04%Best |
| AUM | $21M | $95.8B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 2.23% |
| Holdings | 46 | 610 |
| YTD Return | +6.20% | +15.95%Best |
| 1Y Return | - | +19.62% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +19.64% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +11.48% |
| Top 10 Weight | 30.3% | 25.8%Best |
| Fund Family | Logan Capital | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Sep 29, 2026 | Nov 10, 2006 |
Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.
LCIV 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.
LCIV vs VYM Performance
Logan Capital International ETF (LCIV) is an ETF from Logan Capital and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Year to date, LCIV is up 6.20% versus a gain of 15.95% for VYM.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
LCIV charges 0.99% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $99 vs $4 annually, a gap of $95 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LCIV currently yields 0.00% against 2.23% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
1.5% of LCIV's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 0.1% of VYM's money is in holdings LCIV also owns.
LCIV and VYM share little of their money.
The two holdings books were reported 60 days apart, LCIV as of Oct 30, 2026 and VYM as of Aug 31, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
1 positions in common, counted across the 45 positions we hold weights for in LCIV and 602 in VYM, against full books of 46 and 610.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 575 positions for VYM that do not appear in our book for LCIV (98.5% of the fund), and 21 for LCIV that do not appear in VYM (46.6%).
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 LCIV | Weight in VYM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWSmurfit Westrock Plc | 1.46% | 0.10% | 1.36% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of LCIV and VYM you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, LCIV or VYM?
LCIV has an expense ratio of 0.99% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option, by $95 a year on a $10,000 investment.
What is the holdings overlap between LCIV and VYM?
1.5% of LCIV's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 0.1% of VYM's is in holdings LCIV also owns. They hold 1 positions in common, counted across the 45 positions we hold weights for in LCIV and 602 in VYM.
Which pays a higher dividend, LCIV or VYM?
LCIV yields 0.00% while VYM yields 2.23%, so VYM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VYM better than LCIV?
VYM has a lower expense ratio. VYM is less concentrated, with 25.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 30.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.