LRGF vs VYM
iShares US Equity Factor ETF vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Which is better, LRGF or VYM?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Value.
VYM has a lower expense ratio. LRGF led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, VYM over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90. VYM is less concentrated, with 26.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 34.9%.
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 | LRGF | VYM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.08% | 0.04%Best |
| AUM | $3.7B | $81.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.05% | 2.22% |
| Holdings | 298 | 613 |
| YTD Return | +11.62% | +11.71%Best |
| 1Y Return | +14.20% | +16.24%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.39%Best | +17.24% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.44%Best | +11.86% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.3% | 14.0%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -36.0% | -35.7%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,786Best | $17,514 |
| Top 10 Weight | 34.9% | 26.1%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Apr 28, 2015 | Nov 10, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Apr 30, 2015 to Sep 16, 2026 (11.4 years).
LRGF 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 11.4 years both funds cover.
LRGF vs VYM Performance
iShares US Equity Factor ETF (LRGF) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year LRGF returned +14.20% while VYM returned +16.24%. Year to date, LRGF is up 11.62% versus a gain of 11.71% for VYM.
Over three years, LRGF compounded at +21.39% per year against +17.24% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +13.44% and +11.86% respectively. Across the full 11-year window we track, LRGF has the edge at +11.28% annualized vs +9.11%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
LRGF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.3% 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 -36.0% for LRGF 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 0.90. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
LRGF charges 0.08% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $8 vs $4 annually, a gap of $4 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LRGF currently yields 1.05% against 2.22% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
36.0% of LRGF's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 67.1% of VYM's money is in holdings LRGF also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
124 positions in common, counted across the 289 positions we hold weights for in LRGF and 557 in VYM, against full books of 298 and 613.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 406 positions for VYM that do not appear in our book for LRGF (30.2% of the fund), and 158 for LRGF 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 LRGF | Weight in VYM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.75% | 7.35% | 4.60% |
| JPMJpmorgan Chase | 1.57% | 3.82% | 2.25% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 1.17% | 2.51% | 1.34% |
| XOMExxon Mobil Corp. | 1.01% | 2.63% | 1.62% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 0.86% | 1.80% | 0.94% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 0.58% | 1.86% | 1.28% |
| BACBank of America Corp.: Financials | 0.53% | 1.66% | 1.13% |
| CVXChevron Corp | 0.56% | 1.48% | 0.92% |
| PGProcter & Gamble Company | 0.60% | 1.37% | 0.77% |
| CATCaterpillar, Inc. | 0.47% | 1.50% | 1.03% |
67.1% of VYM is already inside LRGF.
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, LRGF or VYM?
LRGF has an expense ratio of 0.08% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option, by $4 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, LRGF or VYM?
Over the past year LRGF returned +14.20% vs +16.24% for VYM, so VYM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (11 years), LRGF annualized +11.28% vs +9.11% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, LRGF or VYM?
LRGF has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 14.0% for VYM. Worst drawdown: LRGF -36.0% vs VYM -35.7%.
Should I hold both LRGF and VYM?
LRGF and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.90, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between LRGF and VYM?
67.1% of VYM's money is in holdings LRGF also owns. 67.1% of VYM's is in holdings LRGF also owns. They hold 124 positions in common, counted across the 289 positions we hold weights for in LRGF and 557 in VYM.
Which pays a higher dividend, LRGF or VYM?
LRGF yields 1.05% while VYM yields 2.22%, so VYM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VYM better than LRGF?
VYM has a lower expense ratio. LRGF led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, VYM over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90. VYM is less concentrated, with 26.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 34.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.