VYM holdings

Computed by this site from the fund's SEC Form N-PORT filing; what the measure does not tell you · every fund in one table · hold it with other funds? X-ray the mix. Pricing: 100% at a quoted market price (level 1), one issuer country.

VYM's largest investment is Broadcom Inc at 8.03% of net assets. Jpmorgan Chase and Exxon Mobil Corp follow; the three together are 14.09%. Ten companies are 26.16% of the fund; the other 599 share the rest. Among the 721 equity funds measured here, VYM behaves like 74.1 holdings against a median of 42.4 — 1.8 times the median. Across 27 quarterly filings VYM has held roughly steady since 2019-10-31 (76.3 then, 71.5 now). Between the 2026-01-31 and 2026-04-30 filings 79 positions were added and 33 dropped; 11.6% of the weight moved.

Each sentence is read from the fund's own SEC filing; the class median is computed across the comparable equity funds on this site. Nothing here is a view on the fund.

Between 2019-10-31 and 2026-04-30, VYM went from behaving like 76.3 equally weighted positions to 71.5 — 6% fewer, while its top ten went from 26.87% to 25.6% of net assets. Read across the funds on the concentration-over-time table.

One row per filed reporting period, newest first, read from EDGAR. Quarterly because that is the public filing cadence. Rows marked * are published but held out of the comparison above; the methodology page says when and why.

Measured against every other fund on this site, from the same filings. Combined effective holdings is how the pair behaves held in equal size.

The 15 largest of 609 positions in VYM's Form N-PORT, weight as a share of net assets, securities-lending collateral excluded. Every position, every quarter: VYM.csv.gz.

Monthly total returns from Item B.5 of VYM's own filings, 81 months on record. Not computed here and not from a price feed.

Cross-checked against a series computed separately from prices: median difference 0.04 percentage points over 81 months, which is roughly the distributions. Every month with the filing it came from: VYM.json · all funds.

The fund lends its holdings, and Item B.4.a of the filing names every firm holding them. At 2026-07-31, $11m was out to 3 borrowers. The largest, BARCLAYS BANK PLC, held 74.8% of it.

The filing reports no cash collateral position against this loan. Collateral taken in a form the fund does not hold as a position does not appear in N-PORT, so this is silence rather than absence. What the collateral figure can and cannot show. Every quarter VYM has filed, with each borrower: VYM.json · all funds.

564 positions became 610: 79 added (7.8% of the fund at the later date), 33 dropped (3.8% at the earlier date). Half the sum of all weight changes, a turnover proxy: 11.6%. Positions are matched on identifiers, so a security whose identifier changed shows as one drop and one add. Every filing of VYM compared this way, as a feed: changes.xml · all funds: filings received.

New: Oracle Corp (1.13%), Linde PLC (0.98%), Walt Disney Co/The (0.77%), Capital One Financial Corp (0.49%), T-Mobile US Inc (0.39%), Marsh & McLennan Cos Inc (0.34%). Gone: Walmart Inc (2.36%), Seagate Technology Holdings PLC (0.39%), Corning Inc (0.37%), FTAI Aviation Ltd (0.13%), Qnity Electronics Inc (0.09%), nVent Electric PLC (0.08%).

99.84% equity, 0.16% short-term investment as filed; 100.0% carried at a quoted market price (fair-value level 1). Categories and levels are the filer's; what a low level-1 share does and does not mean is in the measure's page.

A position count cannot describe a fund that uses derivatives, because a swap is filed at its unrealised gain, not its exposure. These are the notionals the fund itself reported, against net assets of $94.63B. Notional of an interest-rate or currency swap is not equity exposure.

Financing leg as filed: the fund pays OBFR01 + 0% on $380M of long swap notional . Issuers fill the spread field differently (some file the all-in rate), so compare within an issuer, not across.

Full detail for every fund that files derivatives: leverage.json (CC BY 4.0).

Every measured equity fund lined up by how many holdings it behaves like; these sit either side of VYM (74.1). Same filings, same arithmetic. Position in this list says nothing about which fund is better.

• SCHD Holdings: 99 Stocks, the Top 10 at 44%, and What It Actually Adds to a VOO Portfolio

  What the Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF held on 31 May 2026 from its SEC Form N-PORT filing: all 99 stocks with weights, Qualcomm 6.7%, Texas Instruments 5.9%, UnitedHealth 5.1%; the top ten are 43.6% and the fund behaves like 32 equal holdings. Then the question people are really asking — 92% of SCHD's money sits in companies VOO already owns, so what does holding both change? The overlap arithmetic answers it.

  18 Sept 2026 6 min ETF Analysis

• VYM vs SCHD: High Yield vs Dividend Quality — Two Different Bets on Income

  VYM and SCHD both market themselves as dividend funds, but they are built on different screens — VYM ranks the broad market by forward yield; SCHD filters...

  21 Jun 2026 9 min ETF Analysis

• VPU vs XLU: A Fee, Liquidity, and Concentration Comparison for Long-Horizon Utility Exposure

  VPU (0.09%) and XLU (0.08%) are functionally near-identical at the top of the basket — the holdings overlap is far more important than the 1 bp fee gap....

  15 Mar 2026 9 min ETF Analysis