LRNZ vs VYM
TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Which is better, LRNZ or VYM?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Value.
VYM has a lower expense ratio. LRNZ led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window, VYM over 5Y. VYM is less concentrated, with 25.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 53.1%.
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 | LRNZ | VYM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.68% | 0.04%Best |
| AUM | $40M | $81.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 2.22% |
| Holdings | 26 | 613 |
| YTD Return | +30.19%Best | +13.15% |
| 1Y Return | +36.24%Best | +17.82% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +24.10%Best | +17.99% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +4.57% | +12.16%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 33.4% | 14.0%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -61.3% | -30.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $12,504 | $17,750Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 53.1% | 25.9%Best |
| Fund Family | TrueShares | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Feb 28, 2020 | Nov 10, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Mar 2, 2020 to Sep 10, 2026 (6.5 years).
LRNZ 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 6.5 years both funds cover.
LRNZ vs VYM Performance
TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF (LRNZ) is an ETF from TrueShares and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year LRNZ returned +36.24% while VYM returned +17.82%. Year to date, LRNZ is up 30.19% versus a gain of 13.15% for VYM.
Over three years, LRNZ compounded at +24.10% per year against +17.99% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +4.57% and +12.16% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, LRNZ has the edge at +14.49% annualized vs +12.84%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
LRNZ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 33.4% 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 -61.3% for LRNZ and -30.4% 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 0.28. They move largely independently of each other.
Fees and Cost Over Time
LRNZ charges 0.68% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $68 vs $4 annually, a gap of $64 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, LRNZ currently yields 0.00% against 2.22% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
7.3% of LRNZ's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 8.1% of VYM's money is in holdings LRNZ also owns.
VYM and LRNZ share little of their money.
2 positions in common, counted across the 26 positions we hold weights for in LRNZ and 603 in VYM, against full books of 26 and 613.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 566 positions for VYM that do not appear in our book for LRNZ (89.4% of the fund), and 22 for LRNZ that do not appear in VYM (85.3%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of LRNZ 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, LRNZ or VYM?
LRNZ has an expense ratio of 0.68% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option, by $64 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, LRNZ or VYM?
Over the past year LRNZ returned +36.24% vs +17.82% for VYM, so LRNZ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), LRNZ annualized +14.49% vs +12.84% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, LRNZ or VYM?
LRNZ has been the more volatile fund at 33.4% annualized versus 14.0% for VYM. Worst drawdown: LRNZ -61.3% vs VYM -30.4%.
Should I hold both LRNZ and VYM?
LRNZ and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.28, 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 LRNZ and VYM?
8.1% of VYM's money is in holdings LRNZ also owns. 8.1% of VYM's is in holdings LRNZ also owns. They hold 2 positions in common, counted across the 26 positions we hold weights for in LRNZ and 603 in VYM.
Which pays a higher dividend, LRNZ or VYM?
LRNZ yields 0.00% while VYM yields 2.22%, so VYM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VYM better than LRNZ?
VYM has a lower expense ratio. LRNZ led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window, VYM over 5Y. VYM is less concentrated, with 25.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 53.1%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.