MGV vs VYM
Vanguard Morningstar Mega Cap Value ETF vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Which is better, MGV or VYM?
Nearly the same fund. VYM costs less.
VYM has a lower expense ratio. MGV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. VYM is less concentrated, with 26.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 28.5%.
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 | MGV | VYM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.05% | 0.04%Best |
| AUM | $13.4B | $81.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.82% | 2.22% |
| Holdings | 125 | 613 |
| YTD Return | +16.91%Best | +10.96% |
| 1Y Return | +22.35%Best | +15.42% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +19.47%Best | +17.78% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.42%Best | +12.05% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.3% | 14.8%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -57.5% | -56.1%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,769Best | $17,663 |
| Top 10 Weight | 28.5% | 26.1%Best |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Dec 17, 2007 | Nov 10, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 21, 2007 to Sep 22, 2026 (18.8 years).
MGV 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 18.8 years both funds cover.
MGV vs VYM Performance
Vanguard Morningstar Mega Cap Value ETF (MGV) is an ETF from Vanguard (US) and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year MGV returned +22.35% while VYM returned +15.42%. Year to date, MGV is up 16.91% versus a gain of 10.96% for VYM.
Over three years, MGV compounded at +19.47% per year against +17.78% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +13.42% and +12.05% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, MGV has the edge at +7.24% annualized vs +7.05%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MGV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.3% compared with 14.8% 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 -57.5% for MGV and -56.1% 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 0.97. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
MGV charges 0.05% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $5 vs $4 annually, a gap of $1 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, MGV currently yields 1.82% against 2.22% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
68.8% of MGV's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 60.9% of VYM's money is in holdings MGV also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
85 positions in common, counted across the 122 positions we hold weights for in MGV and 557 in VYM, against full books of 125 and 613.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 443 positions for VYM that do not appear in our book for MGV (36.1% of the fund), and 36 for MGV that do not appear in VYM (30.9%).
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 MGV | Weight in VYM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| JPMJpmorgan Chase | 4.46% | 3.82% | 0.64% |
| XOMExxon Mobil Corp. | 3.05% | 2.63% | 0.42% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 2.92% | 2.51% | 0.41% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 2.10% | 1.80% | 0.30% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 1.95% | 1.86% | 0.09% |
| BACBank of America Corp.: Financials | 1.87% | 1.66% | 0.21% |
| UNHUnitedhealth Group Incorporated | 1.78% | 1.52% | 0.26% |
| CATCaterpillar, Inc. | 1.78% | 1.50% | 0.28% |
| CVXChevron Corp | 1.76% | 1.48% | 0.28% |
| PGProcter & Gamble Company | 1.59% | 1.37% | 0.22% |
68.8% of MGV is already inside VYM.
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, MGV or VYM?
MGV has an expense ratio of 0.05% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option, by $1 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, MGV or VYM?
Over the past year MGV returned +22.35% vs +15.42% for VYM, so MGV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), MGV annualized +7.24% vs +7.05% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, MGV or VYM?
MGV has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 14.8% for VYM. Worst drawdown: MGV -57.5% vs VYM -56.1%.
Should I hold both MGV and VYM?
MGV and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.97, 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 MGV and VYM?
68.8% of MGV's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 60.9% of VYM's is in holdings MGV also owns. They hold 85 positions in common, counted across the 122 positions we hold weights for in MGV and 557 in VYM.
Which pays a higher dividend, MGV or VYM?
MGV yields 1.82% while VYM yields 2.22%, so VYM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VYM better than MGV?
VYM has a lower expense ratio. MGV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.97. VYM is less concentrated, with 26.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 28.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.