BWG vs VYM
BWG vs VYM
BrandywineGLOBAL Global Income Opportunities Fund Inc vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Quick Verdict
VYM has a lower expense ratio. VYM delivered stronger 1-year returns. VYM offers more diversification with 558 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BWG | VYM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 2.66% | 0.04% | |
| AUM | $142M | $79.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 11.05% | 2.86% | |
| Holdings | 110 | 568 | |
| YTD Return | -0.22% | +15.80% | |
| 1Y Return | +2.61% | +26.12% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +10.44% | +18.25% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +1.97% | +12.51% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.5% | 14.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -58.8% | -58.8% | |
| Fund Family | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Mar 28, 2012 | Nov 10, 2006 |
BWG vs VYM Performance
BrandywineGLOBAL Global Income Opportunities Fund Inc (BWG) is a ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US) and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year BWG returned +2.61% while VYM returned +26.12%. Year to date, BWG is down 0.22% versus a gain of 15.80% for VYM.
Over three years, BWG compounded at +10.44% per year against +18.25% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +1.97% and +12.51% respectively. Across the full 14-year window we track, VYM has the edge at +7.07% annualized vs -2.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BWG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.5% compared with 14.6% for VYM. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -58.8% for BWG and -58.8% for VYM. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.64. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BWG charges 2.66% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $266 vs $4 annually, a gap of $262 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BWG currently yields 11.05% against 2.86% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
BWG and VYM share 0 holdings out of 627 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BWG or VYM?
BWG has an expense ratio of 2.66% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $262 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BWG or VYM?
Over the past year BWG returned +2.61% vs +26.12% for VYM, so VYM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (14 years), BWG annualized -2.29% vs +7.07% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BWG or VYM?
BWG has been the more volatile fund at 15.5% annualized versus 14.6% for VYM. Worst drawdown: BWG -58.8% vs VYM -58.8%.
Should I hold both BWG and VYM?
BWG and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.64, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BWG and VYM?
BWG and VYM share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 627 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BWG or VYM?
BWG yields 11.05% while VYM yields 2.86%, so BWG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.