TDIV vs VYMI: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
TDIV and VYMI are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. TDIV is First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund, while VYMI is Vanguard International High Dividend Yield ETF. VYMI is broader by holdings count, with 1,602 positions versus 95 for TDIV. TDIV is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has VYMI ahead on AIQ Score, 62 versus 51.
What is the main difference between TDIV and VYMI?
VYMI holds 1,602 positions to TDIV's 95, and 0% of their weight is in the same securities.
| Metric | TDIV | VYMI |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.5% | 0.07% |
| Holdings | 95 | 1,602 |
| Top-10 concentration | 50.6% | 13.4% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 1.4% | 3.64% |
| Average volume | 162,186 | 875,055 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | +13.3% | +20.4% |
| YTD return | +17% | +13.5% |
| 5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested | +16.6% | +13.3% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 20.6% | 13.8% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -16.6% | -10.8% |
| Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested | -32% | -24.1% |
| Beta | 1.35 | 0.75 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.54 | 1.14 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.83 | 1.65 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 51/100 | 62/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 4/10 | 8/10 |
| Momentum | 49/100 | 54/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 66/100 | 77/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund vs Vanguard International High Dividend Yield ETF
VYMI leads
VYMI leads by 11 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, and the lead has widened from 7 points over 30 sessions.
Stable: 3 of 4 evidence groups support VYMI, its lead is widening, and its signal state is cleanly positive.
First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund
Vanguard International High Dividend Yield ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VYMI over TDIV, 62 versus 51 as of Oct 21, 2026. VYMI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality. VYMI also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor VYMI today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability. VYMI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 11 points over 30 sessions. VYMI leads on all four AIQ factor dimensions. Value is itself one of those four, so a sweep is not explained by valuation alone — it deserves additional scrutiny for unmodeled catalysts, expectations or event risk.
Compare First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund and Vanguard International High Dividend Yield ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
TDIV vs VYMI: which fits what
Each row is settled by a single measure. Where the gap is too small to matter it reads Similar, and no row decides the comparison as a whole.
| If you want | TDIV | VYMI | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.5% | 0.07% | VYMI |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 95 | 1,602 | VYMI |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 50.6% | 13.4% | VYMI |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 1.4% | 3.64% | VYMI |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years | -32% | -24.1% | VYMI |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 20.6% | 13.8% | VYMI |
Similar means the gap is within 0.01 percentage points of expense ratio, 25% more holdings, 3 points of top-10 weight, 0.2 points of yield, 2 points of drawdown or 1 point of volatility. Past drawdowns and volatility describe the funds’ history, not their future.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes for both ETFs.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare TDIV and VYMI against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Value48 vs 64VYMI +16
- Quality49 vs 60VYMI +11
- Risk Resilience66 vs 77VYMI +11
- Momentum49 vs 54VYMI +5
3 of 4 evidence groups favor VYMI. VYMI’s edge is concentrated in value and quality.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +4, not enough on its own to move the overall score.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +6
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
VYMI's lead widened by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — TDIV and VYMI both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
VYMI (Vanguard International High Dividend Yield ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
TDIV (First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund): the counter-case, on technicals — but at materially higher volatility, 18.1% against 12.1%.
Fund facts, side by side
Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.
| Measure | TDIV | VYMI | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.5% | 0.07% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 95 | 1,602 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 162,186 | 875,055 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 20.6% | 13.8% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -16.6% | -10.8% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.54 | 1.14 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 1.35 | 0.75 | Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio. |
Where the exposure actually sits
Sector exposure for each fund, ordered by the size of the difference.
How much of the same holdings they own
TDIV and VYMI share 0.15% of their weighted exposure across 5 common holdings.
88 holdings are unique to TDIV, and 1,491 holdings are unique to VYMI. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
TDIV is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 50.56% of the fund, against 13.36% for VYMI (95 holdings vs 1,602). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.
Largest shared positions
| Holding | TDIV | VYMI | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| ASXASE Technology Holding Co Ltd | 0.09% | 0.31% | 0.09% |
| OTEXOpen Text Corporation | 0.4% | 0.03% | 0.03% |
| TUTELUS Corporation | 1.54% | 0.01% | 0.01% |
| JOYYJOYY Inc. (ADR) | 0.4% | 0.01% | 0.01% |
| ATHMAutohome Inc. (ADR) | 0.22% | 0.01% | 0.01% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What TDIV adds that VYMI doesn’t
| Holding | TDIV | VYMI |
|---|---|---|
| MSFTMicrosoft Corporation | 9.6% | Not held |
| IBMInternational Business Machines Corporation | 6.93% | Not held |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc. | 6.75% | Not held |
| TXNTexas Instruments Incorporated | 6.19% | Not held |
| ORCLOracle Corporation | 5.56% | Not held |
| TSMTaiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (ADR) | 4.46% | Not held |
What VYMI adds that TDIV doesn’t
| Holding | VYMI | TDIV |
|---|---|---|
| HSBA.LHSBC Holdings PLC | 1.77% | Not held |
| ROP.SWRoche Holding AG | 1.54% | Not held |
| RY.TORoyal Bank of Canada | 1.44% | Not held |
| NOVN.SWNovartis AG | 1.43% | Not held |
| SHEL.LShell PLC | 1.3% | Not held |
| NESN.SWNestle SA | 1.26% | Not held |
Each list is a fund’s largest positions by weight that the other fund does not hold, or holds at less than half the weight.
TDIV vs VYMI: five-year payout growth
VYMI grew its split-adjusted payout faster over 2020-2025 — 11.09% a year against TDIV's 5.79%. VYMI: The 2020 payout was 26.9% below 2019, so the growth rate measures a recovery from a weak starting year.
| Dividend metric | TDIV | VYMI |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y payout CAGR | 5.79% | 11.09% |
| 2020 annual payout | $1.027 | $1.959 |
| 2025 annual payout | $1.361 | $3.315 |
| Calendar-year declines | 1 | 1 |
| Peer rank | #14 of 33 | #5 of 33 |
Split-adjusted annual distributions, 2020–2025. Research as of Sep 19, 2026. Yield and expense ratio above are current values, not part of this window.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor VYMI. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | VYMI | 51 vs 62 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | VYMI | Value 48 vs 64 |
| Technicals | TDIV | Price vs 50-day -0.3% vs -1.1%; vs 200-day 4.9% vs 2.8% |
| Risk Resilience | VYMI | Risk Resilience 66 vs 77 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of TDIV and VYMI and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.
- The AIQ gap is moderate at 11 points.
- The leader's advantage has been widening. (supports the conclusion holding)
- The leader's signal state is cleanly positive. (supports the conclusion holding)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on VYMI.
How the comparison changed
95 daily snapshots · Jun 22 – Oct 20VYMI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 11 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- VYMI +11
- 51 vs 62
- 7 sessions ago
- VYMI +8
- 51 vs 59
- 30 sessions ago
- VYMI +7
- 49 vs 56
- 90 sessions ago
- VYMI +10
- 56 vs 66
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
1 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only TDIV
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral
Only VYMI
- ATR Contraction - Coiling — neutral, volatility, short horizon (0.91%)
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Bollinger Band Squeeze, Golden Cross Active.
TDIV is conflicted, so the timing case there is weaker than the score alone suggests.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.98%, AIQ 0 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.28%, AIQ +1 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1TDIV closes the Value gap — currently 16 points behind, the largest single contributor to VYMI's edge.
- 2TDIV's MACD Bearish Crossover resolves — a bearish momentum rule currently active against it.
- 3VYMI's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Performance
Split across windows| Metric | TDIV | VYMI |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.7% | 0.6% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1.9% | -1.7% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 3.8% | 0.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 7.3% | 4.2% |
| Year to date | 17% | 13.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 13.3% | 20.4% |
Technicals
TDIV has the stronger structure| Metric | TDIV | VYMI |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 51.4 | 56 |
| ADX (14) | 10.8 | 24.7 |
| Price vs 50-day | -0.3% | -1.1% |
| Price vs 200-day | 4.9% | 2.8% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 18.1% | 12.1% |
Risk
VYMI is the more resilient| Metric | TDIV | VYMI |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1.35 | 0.75 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.54 | 1.14 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.83 | 1.65 |
| Max drawdown | -16.6% | -10.8% |
| Current drawdown | -11.7% | -4.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 20.6% | 13.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -2% | -1.3% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between TDIV and VYMI?
VYMI holds 1,602 positions to TDIV's 95, and 0% of their weight is in the same securities.
How much do TDIV and VYMI overlap?
TDIV and VYMI share 0.15% of their weighted exposure across 5 common holdings. 88 holdings are unique to TDIV, and 1,491 holdings are unique to VYMI. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Which ETF is more diversified, TDIV or VYMI?
VYMI holds more positions: 1,602 versus 95 for TDIV.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
VYMI has the lower expense ratio, 0.07% a year against 0.5% for TDIV.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
VYMI, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 3.64% against 1.4% for TDIV.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
TDIV has been more volatile over the past year, at 20.6% annualized against 13.8% for VYMI.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
VYMI fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -24.1% against -32% for TDIV.
Compare TDIV and VYMI with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.