CSM vs VYM
ProShares Large Cap Core Plus vs Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
Which is better, CSM or VYM?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Value.
VYM has a lower expense ratio. CSM led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, VYM over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. VYM is less concentrated, with 25.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 30.0%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CSM | VYM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.45% | 0.04%Best |
| AUM | $523M | $78.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.05% | 2.37% |
| Holdings | 308 | 608 |
| YTD Return | +9.19% | +11.83%Best |
| 1Y Return | +14.52% | +15.96%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.54%Best | +18.60% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.10%Best | +11.51% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.9% | 13.1%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -36.1% | -35.7%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,702Best | $17,241 |
| Top 10 Weight | 30.0% | 25.8%Best |
| Fund Family | ProShares | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | Jul 13, 2009 | Nov 10, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 14, 2009 to Oct 14, 2026 (17.3 years).
CSM vs VYM growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 17.3 years both funds cover.
CSM vs VYM Performance
ProShares Large Cap Core Plus (CSM) is an ETF from ProShares and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year CSM returned +14.52% while VYM returned +15.96%. Year to date, CSM is up 9.19% versus a gain of 11.83% for VYM.
Over three years, CSM compounded at +21.54% per year against +18.60% for VYM; over five years the annualized figures are +12.10% and +11.51% respectively. Across the full 17-year window we track, CSM has the edge at +14.64% annualized vs +10.96%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
CSM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.9% compared with 13.1% 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 -36.1% for CSM and -35.7% for VYM. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.91. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CSM charges 0.45% per year while VYM charges 0.04%. On a $10,000 position that is $45 vs $4 annually, a gap of $41 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CSM currently yields 1.05% against 2.37% for VYM.
Holdings Overlap
34.3% of CSM's money is in holdings VYM also owns. 66.7% of VYM's money is in holdings CSM also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
148 positions in common, counted across the 301 positions we hold weights for in CSM and 602 in VYM, against full books of 308 and 608.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 426 positions for VYM that do not appear in our book for CSM (31.4% of the fund), and 146 for CSM that do not appear in VYM (59.3%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in CSM | Weight in VYM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 1.70% | 6.94% | 5.24% |
| JPMJpmorgan Chase | 0.69% | 3.83% | 3.14% |
| XOMExxonmobil Corp. | 0.49% | 2.70% | 2.21% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 0.39% | 2.58% | 2.19% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 0.36% | 1.83% | 1.47% |
| CATCaterpillar, Inc. | 0.70% | 1.46% | 0.76% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 0.24% | 1.76% | 1.52% |
| PGProcter & Gamble Company | 0.56% | 1.36% | 0.80% |
| MRKMerck & Company Inc | 0.44% | 1.47% | 1.03% |
| BACBank Of America Corp | 0.14% | 1.65% | 1.51% |
66.7% of VYM is already inside CSM.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CSM or VYM?
CSM has an expense ratio of 0.45% while VYM charges 0.04%. VYM is the cheaper option, by $41 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CSM or VYM?
Over the past year CSM returned +14.52% vs +15.96% for VYM, so VYM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (17 years), CSM annualized +14.64% vs +10.96% for VYM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CSM or VYM?
CSM has been the more volatile fund at 14.9% annualized versus 13.1% for VYM. Worst drawdown: CSM -36.1% vs VYM -35.7%.
Should I hold both CSM and VYM?
CSM and VYM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between CSM and VYM?
66.7% of VYM's money is in holdings CSM also owns. 66.7% of VYM's is in holdings CSM also owns. They hold 148 positions in common, counted across the 301 positions we hold weights for in CSM and 602 in VYM.
Which pays a higher dividend, CSM or VYM?
CSM yields 1.05% while VYM yields 2.37%, so VYM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VYM better than CSM?
VYM has a lower expense ratio. CSM led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, VYM over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. VYM is less concentrated, with 25.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 30.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.