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

VTWO vs VYM: how they differ

VTWO and VYM hold 3% of their weight in the same names, and VTWO returned more over the year.

Vanguard Russell 2000 Index Fund and Vanguard High Dividend Yield Index Fund.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, VTWO and VYM hold 3% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions VTWO and VYM both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingVTWOVYM
UMB Financial Corp0.28%0.04%
FirstCash Holdings Inc0.26%0.04%
Old National Bancorp/IN0.25%0.04%
Jackson Financial Inc0.20%0.03%
SM Energy Co0.23%0.03%
GATX Corp0.18%0.03%
Terex Corp0.19%0.03%
Archrock Inc0.17%0.03%
Installed Building Products Inc0.14%0.03%
Noble Corp PLC0.17%0.03%
Southwest Gas Holdings Inc0.17%0.03%
Valley National Bancorp0.20%0.03%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in VTWOOnly in VYM
Bloom Energy Corp 1.83%Broadcom Inc 8.07%
Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd 1.12%JPMorgan Chase & Co 3.36%
Sterling Infrastructure Inc 0.76%Exxon Mobil Corp 2.73%
Fabrinet 0.69%Johnson & Johnson 2.31%
Nextpower Inc 0.67%Caterpillar Inc 1.73%
IonQ Inc 0.63%AbbVie Inc 1.57%
Coeur Mining Inc 0.58%Cisco Systems Inc 1.52%
TTM Technologies Inc 0.52%Chevron Corp 1.51%

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.

VTWO and VYM on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
VTWO
Vanguard Russell 2000 Index Fund
VYM
Vanguard High Dividend Yield Index Fund
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerVanguardVanguard
What it isRussell 2000US high dividend
Total return, 1 year+21.4%+17.6%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+3.9 pts+0.1 pts
Expense ratio0.07%0.04%
Already in the S&P 5000.5%92.2%
Holdings1951608

VTWO in plain words

VTWO is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 2000. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +21.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.07% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 0% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1951 positions, with the top ten at 7.8%. It sat 5.3% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

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, VTWO or VYM?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, VTWO returned +21.4% and VYM returned +17.6%, so VTWO returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, VTWO or VYM?
VTWO charges 0.07% a year and VYM charges 0.04%, so VYM is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do VTWO and VYM overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 0% of VTWO and 92% of VYM by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 3% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources