MNRS vs VYM
Grayscale Bitcoin Miners ETF vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Which is better, MNRS or VYM?
Multi Alternative against Large Cap Value.
VYM has a lower expense ratio. MNRS led over 1Y and the full window. VYM is less concentrated, with 26.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 66.1%.
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 | MNRS | VYM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.59% | 0.04%Best |
| AUM | $10M | $83.1B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.47% | 2.22% |
| Holdings | 27 | 608 |
| Volatility (annualized) | 73.8% | 9.9%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -56.7% | -14.5%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.6 years | $14,338Best | $12,449 |
| Top 10 Weight | 66.1% | 26.1%Best |
| Fund Family | Grayscale | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Alternative | Equity |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Jan 30, 2025 | Nov 10, 2006 |
Not shown on this pair: YTD Return, 1Y Return, 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized).
The two price series end 10 days apart, so a return over any period would be measuring two different stretches of market. Those rows are withheld. MNRS has data through Sep 21, 2026 and VYM through Oct 1, 2026.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.6 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jan 30, 2025 to Sep 21, 2026 (1.6 years).
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MNRS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 73.8% compared with 9.9% 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 -56.7% for MNRS and -14.5% 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 0.29. They move largely independently of each other.
Fees and Cost Over Time
MNRS charges 0.59% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $59 vs $4 annually, a gap of $55 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, MNRS currently yields 0.47% against 2.22% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 26 holdings in MNRS and 557 in VYM, totalling 100.0% and 99.2% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 26 positions we hold weights for in MNRS and 557 in VYM, against full books of 27 and 608.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 528 positions for VYM that do not appear in our book for MNRS (97.1% of the fund), and 20 for MNRS that do not appear in VYM (70.4%).
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 MNRS 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, MNRS or VYM?
MNRS has an expense ratio of 0.59% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option, by $55 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which is riskier, MNRS or VYM?
MNRS has been the more volatile fund at 73.8% annualized versus 9.9% for VYM. Worst drawdown: MNRS -56.7% vs VYM -14.5%.
Should I hold both MNRS and VYM?
MNRS and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.29, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, MNRS or VYM?
MNRS yields 0.47% while VYM yields 2.22%, so VYM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VYM better than MNRS?
VYM has a lower expense ratio. MNRS led over 1Y and the full window. VYM is less concentrated, with 26.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 66.1%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.