VYM vs WLDR
Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF vs Simplify Affinity World Leaders Equity ETF
Which is better, VYM or WLDR?
WLDR has been ahead.
VYM has a lower expense ratio. WLDR led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90. VYM is less concentrated, with 25.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.2%.
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 | VYM | WLDR |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.04%Best | 0.67% |
| AUM | $81.6B | $98M |
| Dividend Yield | 2.22% | 1.26% |
| Holdings | 613 | 117 |
| YTD Return | +13.15% | +32.33%Best |
| 1Y Return | +17.82% | +43.90%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +17.99% | +31.94%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.16% | +19.13%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1%Best | 18.6% |
| Max Drawdown | -35.7%Best | -47.1% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,750 | $23,994Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 25.9%Best | 38.2% |
| Fund Family | Vanguard (US) | Simplify Exchange Traded Funds |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Nov 10, 2006 | Jan 16, 2018 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jan 17, 2018 to Sep 10, 2026 (8.6 years).
VYM vs WLDR 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 8.6 years both funds cover.
VYM vs WLDR Performance
Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is an ETF from Vanguard (US) and Simplify Affinity World Leaders Equity ETF (WLDR) is an ETF from Simplify Exchange Traded Funds. Over the past year VYM returned +17.82% while WLDR returned +43.90%. Year to date, VYM is up 13.15% versus a gain of 32.33% for WLDR.
Over three years, VYM compounded at +17.99% per year against +31.94% for WLDR; over five years the annualized figures are +12.16% and +19.13% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, WLDR has the edge at +11.57% annualized vs +9.17%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
WLDR has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.6% compared with 15.1% 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 -35.7% for VYM and -47.1% for WLDR. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.90. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
VYM charges 0.04% per year while WLDR charges 0.67%. On a $10,000 position that is $4 vs $67 annually, a gap of $63 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, VYM currently yields 2.22% against 1.26% for WLDR.
Holdings Overlap
12.2% of VYM's money is in holdings WLDR also owns. 46.1% of WLDR's money is in holdings VYM also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
38 positions in common, counted across the 603 positions we hold weights for in VYM and 112 in WLDR, against full books of 613 and 117.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 23 positions for WLDR that do not appear in our book for VYM (27.9% of the fund), and 530 for VYM that do not appear in WLDR (85.3%).
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 VYM | Weight in WLDR | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| DELLDell Technologies Inc. | 0.54% | 7.73% | 7.19% |
| HPQHp Inc. | 0.08% | 4.69% | 4.61% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson | 2.54% | 1.47% | 1.07% |
| VZVerizon Communications, Inc. | 0.74% | 2.39% | 1.65% |
| TAt&t, Inc. | 0.58% | 2.11% | 1.53% |
| OMCOmnicom Group Inc. | 0.09% | 2.49% | 2.40% |
| CCitigroup Inc. | 0.94% | 1.24% | 0.30% |
| TGTTarget Corp. | 0.25% | 1.60% | 1.35% |
| EBAYEbay Inc. | 0.21% | 1.46% | 1.25% |
| SSNCSs&C Technologies Holdings Inc. | 0.05% | 1.60% | 1.55% |
46.1% of WLDR 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, VYM or WLDR?
VYM has an expense ratio of 0.04% while WLDR charges 0.67%. VYM is the cheaper option, by $63 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, VYM or WLDR?
Over the past year VYM returned +17.82% vs +43.90% for WLDR, so WLDR leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), VYM annualized +9.17% vs +11.57% for WLDR. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, VYM or WLDR?
WLDR has been the more volatile fund at 18.6% annualized versus 15.1% for VYM. Worst drawdown: VYM -35.7% vs WLDR -47.1%.
Should I hold both VYM and WLDR?
VYM and WLDR have a monthly-return correlation of 0.90, 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 VYM and WLDR?
46.1% of WLDR's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 46.1% of WLDR's is in holdings VYM also owns. They hold 38 positions in common, counted across the 603 positions we hold weights for in VYM and 112 in WLDR.
Which pays a higher dividend, VYM or WLDR?
VYM yields 2.22% while WLDR yields 1.26%, so VYM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is WLDR better than VYM?
VYM has a lower expense ratio. WLDR led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90. VYM is less concentrated, with 25.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.