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

FNDX vs VYM: how they differ

FNDX and VYM hold 48% of their weight in the same names, and FNDX returned more over the year.

Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF and Vanguard High Dividend Yield Index Fund.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, FNDX and VYM hold 48% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions FNDX and VYM both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingFNDXVYM
Exxon Mobil Corp2.29%2.73%
Chevron Corp1.49%1.51%
JPMorgan Chase & Co1.38%3.36%
UnitedHealth Group Inc1.37%1.41%
Johnson & Johnson0.97%2.31%
Cisco Systems Inc0.90%1.52%
Bank of America Corp0.87%1.45%
Citigroup Inc0.85%0.89%
Verizon Communications Inc0.99%0.85%
AT&T Inc0.81%0.76%
Merck & Co Inc0.68%1.14%
Wells Fargo & Co0.68%1.07%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in FNDXOnly in VYM
Apple Inc 4.64%Linde PLC 0.98%
Intel Corp 2.57%Eaton Corp PLC 0.71%
Alphabet Inc 2.38%Chubb Ltd 0.50%
Microsoft Corp 2.33%Accenture PLC 0.46%
Alphabet Inc 1.90%Medtronic PLC 0.43%
Amazon.com Inc 1.86%Johnson Controls International plc 0.37%
Micron Technology Inc 1.60%CRH PLC 0.33%
Berkshire Hathaway Inc 1.41%NXP Semiconductors NV 0.31%

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 May 31, 2026.

FNDX and VYM on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
FNDX
Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF
VYM
Vanguard High Dividend Yield Index Fund
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerSchwabVanguard
What it isFundamental U.S. Large CompanyUS high dividend
Total return, 1 year+26.1%+17.6%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+8.6 pts+0.1 pts
Expense ratio0.25%0.04%
Already in the S&P 50091.2%92.2%
Holdings733608

FNDX in plain words

FNDX is an index equity fund tracking the Fundamental U.S. Large Company. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +26.1% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.25% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 91% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 733 positions, with the top ten at 22.5%.

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, FNDX or VYM?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FNDX returned +26.1% and VYM returned +17.6%, so FNDX returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, FNDX or VYM?
FNDX charges 0.25% a year and VYM charges 0.04%, so VYM is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do FNDX and VYM overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 91% of FNDX and 92% of VYM by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 48% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources