Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

CGBL vs VYM: how they differ

CGBL and VYM hold 15% of their weight in the same names, and VYM returned more over the year.

Capital Group Core Balanced ETF and Vanguard High Dividend Yield Index Fund.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, CGBL and VYM hold 15% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions CGBL and VYM both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingCGBLVYM
Broadcom Inc4.57%8.07%
Philip Morris International Inc2.07%1.08%
Bank of America Corp0.96%1.45%
Gilead Sciences Inc0.74%0.68%
Union Pacific Corp0.79%0.67%
UnitedHealth Group Inc0.63%1.41%
Caterpillar Inc0.58%1.73%
Amgen Inc0.54%0.72%
Home Depot Inc/The0.50%1.37%
Capital One Financial Corp0.62%0.49%
ConocoPhillips0.46%0.65%
Southern Co/The0.97%0.45%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in CGBLOnly in VYM
Capital Group Core Plus Income ETF 23.22%Exxon Mobil Corp 2.73%
Capital Group Core Bond ETF 15.60%Johnson & Johnson 2.31%
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Lt 3.48%AbbVie Inc 1.57%
Alphabet Inc 2.78%Cisco Systems Inc 1.52%
Micron Technology Inc 2.23%Chevron Corp 1.51%
Apple Inc 2.00%Procter & Gamble Co/The 1.45%
Microsoft Corp 1.96%Coca-Cola Co/The 1.28%
GE Vernova Inc 1.25%Oracle Corp 1.14%

Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated Apr 30, 2026 and Jun 30, 2026.

CGBL and VYM on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
CGBL
Capital Group Core Balanced ETF
VYM
Vanguard High Dividend Yield Index Fund
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerCapitalVanguard
What it isCore BalancedUS high dividend
Total return, 1 year+9.9%+17.6%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−7.6 pts+0.1 pts
Expense ratio0.33%0.04%
Already in the S&P 50048.1%92.2%
Holdings77608

CGBL in plain words

CGBL is an index equity fund tracking the Core Balanced. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +9.9% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.33% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 48% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 77 positions, with the top ten at 59.2%.

VYM in plain words

VYM is an index equity fund tracking the US high dividend. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.04% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 92% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 608 positions, with the top ten at 25.7%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, CGBL or VYM?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGBL returned +9.9% and VYM returned +17.6%, so VYM returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, CGBL or VYM?
CGBL charges 0.33% a year and VYM charges 0.04%, so VYM is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do CGBL and VYM overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 48% of CGBL and 92% of VYM by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 15% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.

Other comparisons

Where to next

Where these figures came from

ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.

CGBL against VYM, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, CGBL against VYM, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/CGBL-VYM Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources