QDF vs VYM
Northern Trust Quality Dividend ETF vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Which is better, QDF or VYM?
Nearly the same fund. VYM costs less.
VYM has a lower expense ratio. QDF led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window, VYM over 5Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.95. VYM is less concentrated, with 26.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.1%.
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 | QDF | VYM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.39% | 0.04%Best |
| AUM | $2.2B | $81.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.47% | 2.22% |
| Holdings | 119 | 613 |
| YTD Return | +12.07%Best | +11.35% |
| 1Y Return | +16.61%Best | +15.34% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +18.34%Best | +17.22% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.14% | +12.30%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.3% | 13.3%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -37.2% | -35.7%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,734 | $17,861Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 38.1% | 26.1%Best |
| Fund Family | Northern Trust Asset Management | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Dec 14, 2012 | Nov 10, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 19, 2012 to Sep 18, 2026 (13.7 years).
QDF 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 13.7 years both funds cover.
QDF vs VYM Performance
Northern Trust Quality Dividend ETF (QDF) is an ETF from Northern Trust Asset Management and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year QDF returned +16.61% while VYM returned +15.34%. Year to date, QDF is up 12.07% versus a gain of 11.35% for VYM.
Over three years, QDF compounded at +18.34% per year against +17.22% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +12.14% and +12.30% respectively. Across the full 14-year window we track, QDF has the edge at +10.53% annualized vs +10.01%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QDF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.3% compared with 13.3% 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 -37.2% for QDF 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 0.95. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
QDF charges 0.39% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $39 vs $4 annually, a gap of $35 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, QDF currently yields 1.47% against 2.22% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
46.6% of QDF's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 42.0% of VYM's money is in holdings QDF also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
88 positions in common, counted across the 140 positions we hold weights for in QDF and 557 in VYM, against full books of 119 and 613.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 439 positions for VYM that do not appear in our book for QDF (55.0% of the fund), and 49 for QDF that do not appear in VYM (51.5%).
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
| Stock | Weight in QDF | Weight in VYM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.74% | 7.35% | 4.61% |
| JPMJpmorgan Chase | 2.57% | 3.82% | 1.25% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 2.90% | 2.51% | 0.39% |
| XOMExxon Mobil Corp. | 0.43% | 2.63% | 2.20% |
| PMPhilip Morris International Inc. | 1.84% | 1.21% | 0.63% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 0.57% | 1.80% | 1.23% |
| PGProcter & Gamble Company | 0.97% | 1.37% | 0.40% |
| MSMorgan Stanley | 1.20% | 0.96% | 0.24% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 0.11% | 1.86% | 1.75% |
| GILDGilead Sciences | 1.23% | 0.66% | 0.57% |
46.6% of QDF 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, QDF or VYM?
QDF has an expense ratio of 0.39% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option, by $35 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, QDF or VYM?
Over the past year QDF returned +16.61% vs +15.34% for VYM, so QDF leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (14 years), QDF annualized +10.53% vs +10.01% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, QDF or VYM?
QDF has been the more volatile fund at 14.3% annualized versus 13.3% for VYM. Worst drawdown: QDF -37.2% vs VYM -35.7%.
Should I hold both QDF and VYM?
QDF and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.95, 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 QDF and VYM?
46.6% of QDF's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 42.0% of VYM's is in holdings QDF also owns. They hold 88 positions in common, counted across the 140 positions we hold weights for in QDF and 557 in VYM.
Which pays a higher dividend, QDF or VYM?
QDF yields 1.47% while VYM yields 2.22%, so VYM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VYM better than QDF?
VYM has a lower expense ratio. QDF led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window, VYM over 5Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.95. VYM is less concentrated, with 26.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.1%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.