VYMI vs XYLD: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk

VYMI and XYLD are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. VYMI is Vanguard International High Dividend Yield ETF, while XYLD is Global X - S&P 500 Covered Call ETF. VYMI is broader by holdings count, with 1,602 positions versus 507 for XYLD. XYLD is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has VYMI ahead on AIQ Score, 62 versus 48.

Market data as of Oct 21, 2026 market close· Fund characteristics as of Oct 21, 2026
VYMI
Vanguard
vs
XYLD
Global X
VYMI
Vanguard International High Dividend Yield ETF
Issuer
Vanguard
Inception
2016-02-25
XYLD
Global X - S&P 500 Covered Call ETF
Issuer
Global X
Inception
2013-06-21

What is the main difference between VYMI and XYLD?

VYMI holds 1,602 positions to XYLD's 507, and 0% of their weight is in the same securities.

Expense ratio
VYMI
0.07%
XYLD
0.6%
Lower annual fund costVYMI
Holdings
VYMI
1,602
XYLD
507
Broader reported basketVYMI
1Y return
VYMI
+20.4%
XYLD
+4.9%
Trailing performanceVYMI
Annualized volatility
VYMI
13.8%
XYLD
7.5%
Lower realized volatilityXYLD
MetricVYMIXYLD
Fund
Expense ratio0.07%0.6%
Holdings1,602507
Top-10 concentration13.4%38%
Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months3.64%10.24%
Average volume875,055625,833
Performance
1Y return+20.4%+4.9%
YTD return+13.5%+1.9%
5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested+13.3%+7.4%
Risk
Annualized volatility13.8%7.5%
Max drawdown (1Y)-10.8%-6.6%
Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested-24.1%-18.7%
Beta0.750.47
Sharpe ratio1.140.05
Sortino ratio1.650.06
AlgovestIQ
AIQ Score62/10048/100
AIQ Edge Score8/103/10
Momentum54/10044/100
Risk Resilience77/10074/100

AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison

Vanguard International High Dividend Yield ETF vs Global X - S&P 500 Covered Call ETF

Data as of Oct 21, 2026· market close· Dividend & Income· Coverage 64/66 fields· High confidence
AIQ VerdictStableAIQ Comparison Conviction 7/10

VYMI leads

VYMI leads by 14 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, and the lead has widened from 2 points over 30 sessions.

Stable: 2 of 4 evidence groups support VYMI, its lead is widening, and its signal state is cleanly positive.

Evidence agreement: 2 of 4Comparison trend: Strengthening
VYMI

Vanguard International High Dividend Yield ETF

Leads
AIQ Score
62/100
AIQ Edge Score
8/10
XYLD

Global X - S&P 500 Covered Call ETF

AIQ Score
48/100
AIQ Edge Score
3/10

The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors VYMI over XYLD, 62 versus 48 as of Oct 21, 2026. VYMI's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum. VYMI also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor VYMI today, and the comparison is rated Stable on stability: only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. VYMI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 2 to 14 points over 30 sessions.

Compare Vanguard International High Dividend Yield ETF and Global X - S&P 500 Covered Call ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.

VYMI vs XYLD: 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 wantVYMIXYLDFits
Lower costExpense ratio0.07%0.6%VYMI
Broader diversificationNumber of holdings1,602507VYMI
Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings13.4%38%VYMI
Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield3.64%10.24%XYLD
Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years-24.1%-18.7%XYLD
Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year13.8%7.5%XYLD

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.

Currently unavailable

Performance over time

Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes for both ETFs.

VYMI
+86.6%
XYLD
+43.0%

Total return comparison

Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested

VYMI $18,663 · XYLD $14,295

Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.

Compare VYMI and XYLD against another ticker

Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.

Basic: 2 symbols·Explorer: 3 symbols·Pro and Premium: 5 symbols·Your limit: 2

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.

VYMI advantage
0
XYLD advantage
  • Value64 vs 35
    VYMI +29
  • Momentum54 vs 44
    VYMI +10
  • Quality60 vs 52
    VYMI +8
  • Risk Resilience77 vs 74
    Even

2 of 4 evidence groups favor VYMI. VYMI’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum.

What changed since the last close

Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.

VYMI+1 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum +6

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.

XYLD0 AIQ

Largest factor move: Momentum +2, not enough on its own to move the overall score.

No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 5 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 — VYMI and XYLD both carry a full feed there.

Fund facts, side by side

Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.

MeasureVYMIXYLDWhy it matters
Expense ratio0.07%0.6%Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold.
Holdings1,602507More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns.
Average volume875,055625,833Liquidity — matters most if you trade size.
Annualized volatility13.8%7.5%Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure.
Max drawdown (1Y)-10.8%-6.6%The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year.
Sharpe ratio1.140.05Return per unit of risk. Higher is better.
Beta0.750.47Sensitivity 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.

Technology5.0% vs 40.5%
Financial Services44.0% vs 11.2%
Communication Services3.7% vs 9.9%
Energy8.8% vs 3.4%
Basic Materials6.8% vs 1.6%
Utilities5.0% vs 1.9%
Healthcare6.4% vs 9.3%
Consumer Cyclical6.2% vs 8.8%
VYMIXYLD

How much of the same holdings they own

VYMI and XYLD share 0.03% of their weighted exposure across 2 common holdings.

1,495 holdings are unique to VYMI, and 502 holdings are unique to XYLD. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

XYLD is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 38% of the fund, against 13.36% for VYMI (507 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

HoldingVYMIXYLDShared
APAAPA Group0.05%0.02%0.02%
TELTE CONNECTIVITY PLC0.01%0.1%0.01%

Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.

What VYMI adds that XYLD doesn’t

HoldingVYMIXYLD
HSBA.LHSBC Holdings PLC1.77%Not held
ROP.SWRoche Holding AG1.54%Not held
RY.TORoyal Bank of Canada1.44%Not held
NOVN.SWNovartis AG1.43%Not held
SHEL.LShell PLC1.3%Not held
NESN.SWNestle SA1.26%Not held

What XYLD adds that VYMI doesn’t

HoldingXYLDVYMI
NVDANVIDIA CORP7.97%Not held
AAPLAPPLE INC7.36%Not held
MSFTMICROSOFT CORP5.55%Not held
AMZNAMAZON.COM INC3.79%Not held
GOOGLALPHABET INC-CL A2.99%Not held
AVGOBROADCOM INC2.58%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.

VYMI vs XYLD: five-year payout growth

VYMI grew its split-adjusted payout faster over 2020-2025 — 11.09% a year against XYLD's 3.02%. VYMI: The 2020 payout was 26.9% below 2019, so the growth rate measures a recovery from a weak starting year.

Dividend metricVYMIXYLD
5Y payout CAGR11.09%3.02%
2020 annual payout$1.959$3.681
2025 annual payout$3.315$4.271
Calendar-year declines12
Peer rank#5 of 33#2 of 3

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

2 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 groupFavorsReading
AIQ ScoreVYMI62 vs 48
FundamentalsNot coveredNot covered
ValuationVYMIValue 64 vs 35
TechnicalsEvenPrice vs 50-day -1.1% vs -0.2%; vs 200-day 2.8% vs 1.5%
Risk ResilienceEvenRisk Resilience 77 vs 74
Analyst expectationsNot coveredNot covered

✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of VYMI and XYLD and are excluded from the count.

AIQ Decision Stability

Stable

The conclusion rests on a wide gap and broad agreement. It is unlikely to turn on a single session.

  • The AIQ gap is wide at 14 points. (supports the conclusion holding)
  • Only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
  • 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

41 daily snapshots · Sep 8 – Oct 20

VYMI lead: Strengthening — the AIQ differential moved from 2 to 14 points over 30 sessions.

Sep 8VYMI leads above the line · XYLD leads belowOct 20
Today
VYMI +14
62 vs 48
7 sessions ago
VYMI +2
59 vs 57
30 sessions ago
VYMI +2
56 vs 54
90 sessions ago
Not covered

The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Oct 9 when XYLD moved ahead of VYMI.

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.

VYMI

2 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral

Only VYMI

  • Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
  • MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
XYLDConflicted

3 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted

Only XYLD

  • EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
  • 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.2%)
  • MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon

Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, ATR Contraction - Coiling.

XYLD 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.

VYMIConfirmed strength

Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.28%, AIQ +1 points).

XYLDNo material change

Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.34%, AIQ 0 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.

  1. 1XYLD closes the Value gap — currently 29 points behind, the largest single contributor to VYMI's edge.
  2. 2XYLD generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover or Uptrend Structure Active.
  3. 3VYMI's Golden Cross Active breaks down — it is the strongest rule currently supporting the verdict.
  4. 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

VYMI leads 4 of 6 windows
MetricVYMIXYLD
1 week (5 sessions)0.6%-1.3%
1 month (20 sessions)-1.7%-0.6%
3 months (63 sessions)0.1%1.1%
6 months (126 sessions)4.2%4.2%
Year to date13.5%1.9%
1 year (252 sessions)20.4%4.9%

Technicals

Split
MetricVYMIXYLD
RSI (14)5645.2
ADX (14)24.714.6
Price vs 50-day-1.1%-0.2%
Price vs 200-day2.8%1.5%
Volatility (1M, annualized)12.1%4.9%

Risk

Split
MetricVYMIXYLD
Beta0.750.47
Sharpe ratio1.140.05
Sortino ratio1.650.06
Max drawdown-10.8%-6.6%
Current drawdown-4.6%-1.4%
Annualized volatility13.8%7.5%
Value at risk (95%)-1.3%-0.9%

Straight answers

Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.

What is the difference between VYMI and XYLD?

VYMI holds 1,602 positions to XYLD's 507, and 0% of their weight is in the same securities.

How much do VYMI and XYLD overlap?

VYMI and XYLD share 0.03% of their weighted exposure across 2 common holdings. 1,495 holdings are unique to VYMI, and 502 holdings are unique to XYLD. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.

Which ETF is more diversified, VYMI or XYLD?

VYMI holds more positions: 1,602 versus 507 for XYLD.

Which has the lower expense ratio?

VYMI has the lower expense ratio, 0.07% a year against 0.6% for XYLD.

Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?

XYLD, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 10.24% against 3.64% for VYMI.

Which ETF has been more volatile?

VYMI has been more volatile over the past year, at 13.8% annualized against 7.5% for XYLD.

Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?

XYLD fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -18.7% against -24.1% for VYMI.

Compare VYMI and XYLD 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.