PWRZ vs VYM

PWRZ vs VYM

Which is better, PWRZ or VYM?

All Cap Blend against Large Cap Value.

VYM has a lower expense ratio. PWRZ led over 1Y. VYM is less concentrated, with 26.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 62.9%.

Lower Fees: VYMHigher Returns (1Y): PWRZLess Concentrated: VYM

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

MetricPWRZVYM
Expense Ratio0.75%0.04%Best
AUM$6M$81.6B
Dividend Yield1.87%2.22%
Holdings24613
YTD Return-2.71%+12.29%Best
1Y Return-+16.61%
3Y Return (annualized)-+17.42%
5Y Return (annualized)-+12.12%
Top 10 Weight62.9%26.1%Best
Fund FamilyTrueSharesVanguard (US)
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleAll Cap BlendLarge Cap Value
InceptionDec 8, 2022Nov 10, 2006

Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.

PWRZ 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.

PWRZ vs VYM Performance

TrueShares Eagle Global Next Gen Power Infrastructure ETF (PWRZ) is an ETF from TrueShares and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Year to date, PWRZ is down 2.71% versus a gain of 12.29% for VYM.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Fees and Cost Over Time

PWRZ charges 0.75% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $75 vs $4 annually, a gap of $71 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, PWRZ currently yields 1.87% against 2.22% for VYM.

Holdings Overlap

PWRZ already in VYM36.7%
VYM already in PWRZ1.6%

36.7% of PWRZ's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 1.6% of VYM's money is in holdings PWRZ also owns.

The two portfolios partly overlap.

8 positions in common, counted across the 24 positions we hold weights for in PWRZ and 557 in VYM, against full books of 24 and 613.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 520 positions for VYM that do not appear in our book for PWRZ (95.5% of the fund), and 3 for PWRZ that do not appear in VYM (7.5%).

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

StockWeight in PWRZWeight in VYMDifference
AEPAmerican Electric Power Co Inc9.80%0.28%9.52%
NEENextera Energy Inc6.66%0.74%5.92%
HASIHa Sustainable Infrastructure Capital Inc6.97%0.02%6.95%
CWENClearway Energy, Inc., Class C5.51%0.02%5.49%
DUKDuke Energy Corp1.89%0.40%1.49%
NRGNrg Energy1.93%0.11%1.82%
BKHBlack Hills Corp1.95%0.02%1.93%
OTTROtter Tail Corp.1.95%0.01%1.94%

36.7% of PWRZ 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.

PWRZVYM

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, PWRZ or VYM?

PWRZ has an expense ratio of 0.75% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option, by $71 a year on a $10,000 investment.

What is the holdings overlap between PWRZ and VYM?

36.7% of PWRZ's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 1.6% of VYM's is in holdings PWRZ also owns. They hold 8 positions in common, counted across the 24 positions we hold weights for in PWRZ and 557 in VYM.

Which pays a higher dividend, PWRZ or VYM?

PWRZ yields 1.87% while VYM yields 2.22%, so VYM currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is VYM better than PWRZ?

VYM has a lower expense ratio. PWRZ led over 1Y. VYM is less concentrated, with 26.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 62.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.