QWLD vs VYM
State Street SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Which is better, QWLD or VYM?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Value.
VYM has a lower expense ratio. VYM led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. QWLD is less concentrated, with 17.5% 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 | QWLD | VYM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.30% | 0.04%Best |
| AUM | $177M | $81.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.75% | 2.22% |
| Holdings | 1,281 | 613 |
| YTD Return | +9.17% | +13.15%Best |
| 1Y Return | +14.43% | +17.82%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +16.14% | +17.99%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.70% | +12.16%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.6%Best | 13.7% |
| Max Drawdown | -31.9%Best | -35.7% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $15,887 | $17,750Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 17.5%Best | 25.9% |
| Fund Family | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Jun 4, 2014 | Nov 10, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 5, 2014 to Sep 10, 2026 (12.3 years).
QWLD 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 12.3 years both funds cover.
QWLD vs VYM Performance
State Street SPDR MSCI World StrategicFactors ETF (QWLD) is an ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year QWLD returned +14.43% while VYM returned +17.82%. Year to date, QWLD is up 9.17% versus a gain of 13.15% for VYM.
Over three years, QWLD compounded at +16.14% per year against +17.99% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +9.70% and +12.16% respectively. Across the full 12-year window we track, VYM has the edge at +9.00% annualized vs +8.96%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VYM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 13.7% compared with 12.6% for QWLD. 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 -31.9% for QWLD 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 0.92. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
QWLD charges 0.30% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $30 vs $4 annually, a gap of $26 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, QWLD currently yields 1.75% against 2.22% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
29.1% of QWLD's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 86.3% of VYM's money is in holdings QWLD also owns.
Most of VYM is already inside QWLD. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
231 positions in common, counted across the 1,230 positions we hold weights for in QWLD and 603 in VYM, against full books of 1,281 and 613.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 339 positions for VYM that do not appear in our book for QWLD (11.4% of the fund), and 249 for QWLD that do not appear in VYM (39.3%).
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 QWLD | Weight in VYM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 1.84% | 7.29% | 5.45% |
| JPMJpmorgan Chase & Co. | 0.63% | 3.38% | 2.75% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson | 1.34% | 2.54% | 1.20% |
| XOMExxon Mobil Corp. | 0.80% | 2.36% | 1.56% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 1.06% | 1.93% | 0.87% |
| CATCaterpillar, Inc. | 0.46% | 2.01% | 1.55% |
| PGProcter & Gamble Company | 0.75% | 1.42% | 0.67% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 0.26% | 1.85% | 1.59% |
| MRKMerck & Co. Inc. | 0.75% | 1.32% | 0.57% |
| KOCoca Cola Co. | 0.74% | 1.31% | 0.57% |
86.3% of VYM is already inside QWLD.
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, QWLD or VYM?
QWLD has an expense ratio of 0.30% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option, by $26 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, QWLD or VYM?
Over the past year QWLD returned +14.43% vs +17.82% for VYM, so VYM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (12 years), QWLD annualized +8.96% vs +9.00% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, QWLD or VYM?
VYM has been the more volatile fund at 13.7% annualized versus 12.6% for QWLD. Worst drawdown: QWLD -31.9% vs VYM -35.7%.
Should I hold both QWLD and VYM?
QWLD and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.92, 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 QWLD and VYM?
86.3% of VYM's money is in holdings QWLD also owns. 86.3% of VYM's is in holdings QWLD also owns. They hold 231 positions in common, counted across the 1,230 positions we hold weights for in QWLD and 603 in VYM.
Which pays a higher dividend, QWLD or VYM?
QWLD yields 1.75% while VYM yields 2.22%, so VYM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VYM better than QWLD?
VYM has a lower expense ratio. VYM led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. QWLD is less concentrated, with 17.5% 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.