NOBL vs VYM
ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Which is better, NOBL or VYM?
VYM has been ahead.
VYM has a lower expense ratio. VYM led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. NOBL is less concentrated, with 16.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 25.9%.
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 | NOBL | VYM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.35% | 0.04%Best |
| AUM | $11.9B | $81.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 2.04% | 2.22% |
| Holdings | 69 | 613 |
| YTD Return | +7.90% | +13.15%Best |
| 1Y Return | +10.36% | +17.82%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +8.49% | +17.99%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.00% | +12.16%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.1% | 13.4%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -35.4%Best | -35.7% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $13,382 | $17,750Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 16.1%Best | 25.9% |
| Fund Family | ProShares | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Oct 9, 2013 | Nov 10, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 10, 2013 to Sep 10, 2026 (12.9 years).
NOBL 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 12.9 years both funds cover.
NOBL vs VYM Performance
ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF (NOBL) is an ETF from ProShares and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year NOBL returned +10.36% while VYM returned +17.82%. Year to date, NOBL is up 7.90% versus a gain of 13.15% for VYM.
Over three years, NOBL compounded at +8.49% per year against +17.99% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +6.00% and +12.16% respectively. Across the full 13-year window we track, VYM has the edge at +9.63% annualized vs +9.07%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
NOBL has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.1% compared with 13.4% 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 -35.4% for NOBL 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 0.94. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
NOBL charges 0.35% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $35 vs $4 annually, a gap of $31 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, NOBL currently yields 2.04% against 2.22% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
70.7% of NOBL's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 24.5% of VYM's money is in holdings NOBL also owns.
Most of NOBL is already inside VYM. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
49 positions in common, counted across the 69 positions we hold weights for in NOBL and 603 in VYM, against full books of 69 and 613.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 519 positions for VYM that do not appear in our book for NOBL (73.0% of the fund), and 19 for NOBL that do not appear in VYM (27.7%).
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 NOBL | Weight in VYM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| JNJJohnson & Johnson | 1.41% | 2.54% | 1.13% |
| XOMExxon Mobil Corp. | 1.37% | 2.36% | 0.99% |
| CATCaterpillar, Inc. | 1.37% | 2.01% | 0.64% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 1.36% | 1.85% | 0.49% |
| PGProcter & Gamble Company | 1.38% | 1.42% | 0.04% |
| KOCoca Cola Co. | 1.48% | 1.31% | 0.17% |
| IBMInternational Business Machines Corp. | 1.60% | 1.10% | 0.50% |
| CVXChevron Corp. | 1.35% | 1.28% | 0.07% |
| LINLinde Plc Ordinary Shares | 1.35% | 0.99% | 0.36% |
| MCDMcdonald'S Corp | 1.45% | 0.80% | 0.65% |
70.7% of NOBL 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, NOBL or VYM?
NOBL has an expense ratio of 0.35% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option, by $31 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, NOBL or VYM?
Over the past year NOBL returned +10.36% vs +17.82% for VYM, so VYM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (13 years), NOBL annualized +9.07% vs +9.63% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, NOBL or VYM?
NOBL has been the more volatile fund at 14.1% annualized versus 13.4% for VYM. Worst drawdown: NOBL -35.4% vs VYM -35.7%.
Should I hold both NOBL and VYM?
NOBL and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, 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 NOBL and VYM?
70.7% of NOBL's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 24.5% of VYM's is in holdings NOBL also owns. They hold 49 positions in common, counted across the 69 positions we hold weights for in NOBL and 603 in VYM.
Which pays a higher dividend, NOBL or VYM?
NOBL yields 2.04% while VYM yields 2.22%, so VYM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VYM better than NOBL?
VYM has a lower expense ratio. VYM led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. NOBL is less concentrated, with 16.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 25.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.