RTOO vs VYM
VistaShares Robotics Supercycle ETF vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Which is better, RTOO or VYM?
Mid Cap Growth against Large Cap Value.
VYM has a lower expense ratio. VYM is less concentrated, with 25.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 31.4%.
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 | RTOO | VYM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.75% | 0.04%Best |
| AUM | $4M | $81.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 2.24% |
| Holdings | 61 | 613 |
| YTD Return | -4.03% | +15.29%Best |
| 1Y Return | - | +22.23% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +18.81% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.14% |
| Top 10 Weight | 31.4% | 25.9%Best |
| Fund Family | VistaShares | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Growth | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Jul 15, 2026 | Nov 10, 2006 |
Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.
RTOO 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.
RTOO vs VYM Performance
VistaShares Robotics Supercycle ETF (RTOO) is an ETF from VistaShares and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Year to date, RTOO is down 4.03% versus a gain of 15.29% for VYM.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
RTOO 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, RTOO currently yields 0.00% against 2.24% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
2.7% of RTOO's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 0.2% of VYM's money is in holdings RTOO also owns.
RTOO and VYM share little of their money.
The two holdings books were reported 50 days apart, RTOO as of Aug 19, 2026 and VYM as of Jun 30, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
1 positions in common, counted across the 58 positions we hold weights for in RTOO and 603 in VYM, against full books of 61 and 613.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 569 positions for VYM that do not appear in our book for RTOO (97.2% of the fund), and 12 for RTOO that do not appear in VYM (15.2%).
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 RTOO | Weight in VYM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| ROKRockwell Automation | 2.70% | 0.23% | 2.47% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of RTOO 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, RTOO or VYM?
RTOO 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 RTOO and VYM?
2.7% of RTOO's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 0.2% of VYM's is in holdings RTOO also owns. They hold 1 positions in common, counted across the 58 positions we hold weights for in RTOO and 603 in VYM.
Which pays a higher dividend, RTOO or VYM?
RTOO yields 0.00% while VYM yields 2.24%, so VYM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VYM better than RTOO?
VYM has a lower expense ratio. VYM is less concentrated, with 25.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 31.4%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.