LRNZ vs VYM
TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Quick Verdict
VYM has a lower expense ratio. LRNZ delivered stronger 1-year returns. VYM offers more diversification with 558 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | LRNZ | VYM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.69% | 0.04% | |
| AUM | $37M | $79.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 2.86% | |
| Holdings | 21 | 568 | |
| YTD Return | +39.66% | +16.78% | |
| 1Y Return | +55.39% | +24.43% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +30.01% | +18.60% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.37% | +12.30% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 33.7% | 14.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -61.3% | -58.8% | |
| Fund Family | TrueShares | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Feb 28, 2020 | Nov 10, 2006 |
LRNZ vs VYM Performance
TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF (LRNZ) is a ETF from TrueShares and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year LRNZ returned +55.39% while VYM returned +24.43%. Year to date, LRNZ is up 39.66% versus a gain of 16.78% for VYM.
Over three years, LRNZ compounded at +30.01% per year against +18.60% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +7.37% and +12.30% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, LRNZ has the edge at +15.93% annualized vs +7.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
LRNZ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 33.7% compared with 14.6% 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 -61.3% for LRNZ and -58.8% for VYM. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.28. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
LRNZ charges 0.69% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $69 vs $4 annually, a gap of $65 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LRNZ currently yields 0.00% against 2.86% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, LRNZ or VYM?
LRNZ has an expense ratio of 0.69% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $65 per year of difference.
Which performed better, LRNZ or VYM?
Over the past year LRNZ returned +55.39% vs +24.43% for VYM, so LRNZ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), LRNZ annualized +15.93% vs +7.11% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, LRNZ or VYM?
LRNZ has been the more volatile fund at 33.7% annualized versus 14.6% for VYM. Worst drawdown: LRNZ -61.3% vs VYM -58.8%.
Should I hold both LRNZ and VYM?
LRNZ and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.28, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between LRNZ and VYM?
LRNZ and VYM share 2 common holdings with a 5.3% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 582 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, LRNZ or VYM?
LRNZ yields 0.00% while VYM yields 2.86%, so VYM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.