RPG vs VYM
RPG vs VYM
Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Quick Verdict
VYM has a lower expense ratio. RPG delivered stronger 1-year returns. VYM offers more diversification with 558 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | RPG | VYM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.35% | 0.04% | |
| AUM | $2.0B | $79.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.14% | 2.86% | |
| Holdings | 68 | 568 | |
| YTD Return | +23.44% | +15.80% | |
| 1Y Return | +26.16% | +26.12% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +23.69% | +18.25% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.78% | +12.51% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.7% | 14.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -53.7% | -58.8% | |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Mar 1, 2006 | Nov 10, 2006 |
RPG vs VYM Performance
Invesco S&P 500 Pure Growth ETF (RPG) is a ETF from Invesco (US) and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year RPG returned +26.16% while VYM returned +26.12%. Year to date, RPG is up 23.44% versus a gain of 15.80% for VYM.
Over three years, RPG compounded at +23.69% per year against +18.25% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +8.78% and +12.51% respectively. Across the full 20-year window we track, RPG has the edge at +11.27% annualized vs +7.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
RPG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.7% 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 -53.7% for RPG 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 0.80. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
RPG charges 0.35% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $35 vs $4 annually, a gap of $31 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, RPG currently yields 0.14% against 2.86% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
RPG and VYM share 6 holdings out of 618 unique holdings combined, representing a 3.6% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in RPG | Weight in VYM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AVGO | 1.36% | 6.47% | 5.11% |
| CAT | 1.37% | 1.51% | 0.14% |
| NEM | 1.12% | 0.63% | 0.49% |
| TPR | Pro | Pro | Pro |
| RL | Pro | Pro | Pro |
| LVS | Pro | Pro | Pro |
See all 6 holdings RPG shares with VYM Exact weights in each fund and the difference, for every overlapping position. Get FundXLS Pro: $29/moFirst 500 subscribers, then $49/mo. Cancel anytime. | |||
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, RPG or VYM?
RPG has an expense ratio of 0.35% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $31 per year of difference.
Which performed better, RPG or VYM?
Over the past year RPG returned +26.16% vs +26.12% for VYM, so RPG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (20 years), RPG annualized +11.27% vs +7.07% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, RPG or VYM?
RPG has been the more volatile fund at 18.7% annualized versus 14.6% for VYM. Worst drawdown: RPG -53.7% vs VYM -58.8%.
Should I hold both RPG and VYM?
RPG and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.80, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between RPG and VYM?
RPG and VYM share 6 common holdings with a 3.6% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 618 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, RPG or VYM?
RPG yields 0.14% while VYM yields 2.86%, so VYM 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.