CGDV
Price
$45.98
Change
+$0.59 (+1.30%)
Updated
Apr 17 closing price
Net Assets
32.05B
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
VYM
Price
$155.11
Change
+$1.28 (+0.83%)
Updated
Apr 17 closing price
Net Assets
88.72B
Intraday BUY SELL Signals
Interact to see
Advertisement

CGDV vs VYM

Header iconCGDV vs VYM Comparison
Open Charts CGDV vs VYMBanner chart's image
CGDV vs VYM Comparison Chart in %
loading
loading
View a ticker or compare two or three

Which ETF would AI Choose? Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV) vs. Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM)

Key Takeaways

  • CGDV is actively managed with 53-58 concentrated holdings and a higher expense ratio of 0.33%, while VYM is passively managed tracking the FTSE High Dividend Yield Index with 559 holdings and a low 0.04% expense ratio.
  • CGDV features heavy technology exposure (27%) including top holdings like MSFT and NVDA, contrasting VYM's financials tilt (19%) with leaders like AVGO and JPM.
  • Both focus on U.S. large-cap dividend payers, but CGDV allows up to 10% non-U.S. equities and emphasizes growth alongside income, while VYM excludes REITs for pure high-yield exposure.
  • VYM offers superior cost efficiency and broader diversification, suiting conservative income seekers; CGDV's active approach drives higher recent relative performance through sector rotation.
  • CGDV exhibits lower downside volatility in recent market cycles due to quality focus, while VYM provides steadier yields around 2.3% versus CGDV's 1.3%.
  • Liquidity is strong for both, with VYM's massive AUM ($92B) ensuring tighter spreads compared to CGDV's growing $30B base.

Introduction

In the current market environment of moderating interest rates and sector rotation toward quality dividend payers, comparing CGDV and VYM highlights contrasting strategies for income-oriented investors. Both ETFs target U.S. large-cap companies with attractive dividends, but they cater to different goals: CGDV's active management seeks superior risk-adjusted returns through selective stock picking, while VYM's passive indexing delivers broad high-yield exposure at minimal cost. This ETF comparison reveals how active flexibility stacks up against passive efficiency amid evolving macroeconomic drivers like earnings resilience and yield curve shifts, aiding decisions on sector exposure and fund performance dynamics.

Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV) Overview

The Capital Group Dividend Value ETF (CGDV) is an actively managed fund launched in February 2022, seeking income exceeding the average U.S. equity yield alongside principal growth. Employing Capital Group's multi-manager "Capital System," it invests primarily in dividend-paying stocks of large established U.S. companies (market caps over $4B), with up to 10% in non-U.S. equities. It holds 53-58 stocks, featuring concentrated positions in top holdings like MSFT (5.7%), NVDA (5.2%), AVGO (4.5%), AMAT (3.9%), and RTX (3.7%).

Sector allocations emphasize technology (27%), industrials (17%), and healthcare (14%), diverging from traditional value benchmarks. The expense ratio is 0.33%, with a 30-day SEC yield of 1.31% and annual turnover around 29%. This non-diversified structure allows dynamic adjustments without fixed rebalancing, prioritizing high-quality firms with dividend potential for long-term compounding.

Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM) Overview

The Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF (VYM), inception November 2006, passively tracks the FTSE High Dividend Yield Index, focusing on U.S. companies with above-average dividend yields (excluding REITs). Using full replication, it holds 559 stocks, weighted by market cap, for broad large-value exposure.

Top holdings include AVGO (6.5%), JPM (3.4%), XOM (2.8%), JNJ (2.6%), and WMT (2.5%). Sectors are led by financials (19%), technology (12-15%), industrials (13%), and healthcare (13%). With an ultra-low expense ratio of 0.04%, 30-day SEC yield near 2.3%, and low turnover (11%), VYM emphasizes cost efficiency and stability in high-dividend sector exposure.

Industry and Thematic Backdrop

Dividend-focused large-value ETFs like CGDV and VYM thrive in environments of persistent inflation moderation and anticipated rate cuts, where yield-hungry capital flows into resilient sectors. Financials and energy benefit from strong earnings cycles, while technology's quality subset counters valuation concerns amid AI-driven productivity gains. Macro drivers include steady U.S. GDP growth, commodity stabilization, and geopolitical tensions favoring defensive staples and utilities. Regulatory scrutiny on buybacks minimally impacts these funds, but sector risks like energy volatility and financial credit cycles loom. Capital has rotated into high-quality dividends over recent market cycles, bolstering relative positioning for both amid broader equity dispersion.

Performance and Positioning Comparison

In recent months, CGDV has shown relative strength over VYM, driven by its technology and industrials overweight capturing sector rotation and earnings momentum from holdings like NVDA and MSFT. Over broader cycles since inception, CGDV's active picks have delivered superior total returns with lower downside capture versus the S&P 500, benefiting from quality filters amid volatility spikes.

VYM, meanwhile, exhibits steadier behavior tied to its financials and energy anchors, performing resiliently in high-rate periods but lagging in growth-led rallies. Volatility differences favor CGDV's nuanced exposure in choppy markets, while VYM's diversification shines in prolonged value rotations. Interest rate expectations and commodity trends continue to influence their relative positioning, with CGDV gaining from momentum and VYM from yield stability.

Trending AI Robots

Tickeron’s Trending AI Robots page showcases the platform's top-performing AI trading bots under prevailing market conditions. Tickeron provides hundreds of AI bots scanning thousands of tickers across various timeframes, strategies like trend-following, mean reversion, and momentum, with performance metrics including win rates, profit factors, and drawdowns. Only the strongest, real-time performers rise to this curated section, helping traders identify tools aligned with current volatility, sector trends, or macroeconomic shifts. Explore these bots to enhance your ETF trading decisions—visit today to deploy proven AI signals tailored to dynamic markets.

Tickeron AI Verdict

Tickeron’s AI currently favors CGDV for its structural advantages in trend consistency, sector momentum toward technology and quality industrials, and active risk management yielding better recent relative performance. While VYM excels in cost efficiency and diversification, CGDV's concentrated high-conviction holdings offer a probabilistic edge (estimated 60-65% outperformance likelihood over 12 months) in growth-oriented dividend environments, barring sharp value reversals.

Disclaimer

The information on this webpage is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and is not intended as investment advice, a recommendation to purchase or sell any security, or an offer or solicitation related to investments. It does not consider your personal financial situation, goals, or risk profile, and all investing carries inherent risks, including the possibility of losing your entire investment. For more details, please review our full disclaimer.

Disclaimers and Limitations

VS
CGDV vs. VYM commentary
Apr 19, 2026

To compare these two companies we present long-term analysis, their fundamental ratings and make comparative short-term technical analysis which are presented below. The conclusion is CGDV is a Hold and VYM is a Hold.

Interact to see
Advertisement
SUMMARIES
Loading...
FUNDAMENTALS
Fundamentals
VYM has more net assets: 88.7B vs. CGDV (32B). VYM has a higher annual dividend yield than CGDV: VYM (8.711) vs CGDV (5.643). CGDV was incepted earlier than VYM: CGDV (4 years) vs VYM (19 years). VYM (0.04) has a lower expense ratio than CGDV (0.33). CGDV has a higher turnover VYM (11.00) vs VYM (11.00).
CGDVVYMCGDV / VYM
Gain YTD5.6438.71165%
Net Assets32B88.7B36%
Total Expense Ratio0.330.04825%
Turnover29.0011.00264%
Yield1.342.3756%
Fund Existence4 years19 years-
TECHNICAL ANALYSIS
Technical Analysis
CGDVVYM
RSI
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
61%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
78%
Stochastic
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
76%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
69%
Momentum
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
90%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
85%
MACD
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
89%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
79%
TrendWeek
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
87%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
80%
TrendMonth
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
86%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
77%
Advances
ODDS (%)
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
85%
Bullish Trend 3 days ago
79%
Declines
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 21 days ago
68%
Bearish Trend 5 days ago
75%
BollingerBands
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
67%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
89%
Aroon
ODDS (%)
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
88%
Bearish Trend 3 days ago
68%
View a ticker or compare two or three
Interact to see
Advertisement
CGDV
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
VYM
Daily Signal:
Gain/Loss:
Interesting Tickers
1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
1 Day
ETFs / NAMEPrice $Chg $Chg %
SLVO93.761.36
+1.47%
UBS ETRACS Silver Shares Covered CallETN
FEP58.740.54
+0.93%
First Trust Europe AlphaDEX® ETF
VOX199.050.91
+0.46%
Vanguard Communication Services ETF
IFLN18.470.06
+0.30%
Invesco Bloomberg Enh Flln Angls ETF
TMDV49.43N/A
N/A
ProShares Russell US Dividend Grwr ETF

CGDV and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, CGDV has been loosely correlated with META. These tickers have moved in lockstep 65% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if CGDV jumps, then META could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To CGDV
1D Price
Change %
CGDV100%
+1.30%
META - CGDV
65%
Loosely correlated
+1.73%
SWK - CGDV
63%
Loosely correlated
+4.19%
NVDA - CGDV
63%
Loosely correlated
+1.68%
JPM - CGDV
62%
Loosely correlated
+0.11%
HAS - CGDV
62%
Loosely correlated
+4.07%
More

VYM and

Correlation & Price change

A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, VYM has been closely correlated with TFC. These tickers have moved in lockstep 76% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if VYM jumps, then TFC could also see price increases.

1D
1W
1M
1Q
6M
1Y
5Y
Ticker /
NAME
Correlation
To VYM
1D Price
Change %
VYM100%
+0.83%
TFC - VYM
76%
Closely correlated
+2.31%
HBAN - VYM
75%
Closely correlated
+1.69%
RF - VYM
75%
Closely correlated
+0.75%
APAM - VYM
75%
Closely correlated
+1.95%
TKR - VYM
74%
Closely correlated
+3.60%
More