VBIAX vs VYM: 3% overlap
Vanguard Balanced Index Admiral and Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF share 3.0% of their portfolios by weight — computed as Σ min(wA, wB) over every holding both funds own.
Different holding dates. These holdings were published about 3 months apart — VBIAX as of 2026-03-31, the rest through 2026-06-30. Each fund is compared using its most recent file, so any trading in between shows up as a difference.
You would hold two tickers and get the diversification of 2.0. Two funds that shared nothing would score 2.0; two identical funds score 1.0.
Top shared holdings
VBIAX and VYM hold 99 of the same securities. The ten contributing most to the overlap figure:
| Holding | in VBIAX | in VYM | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| CASH | 1.8% | 0.5% | 1.3% |
| IBM | 0.2% | 1.1% | 0.9% |
| MCD | 0.2% | 0.8% | 0.6% |
| T | 0.2% | 0.6% | 0.4% |
| DIS | 0.2% | 0.7% | 0.5% |
| ETN | 0.1% | 0.7% | 0.6% |
| QCOM | 0.1% | 0.8% | 0.7% |
| MO | 0.1% | 0.5% | 0.4% |
| CME | 0.1% | 0.3% | 0.2% |
| CMCSA | 0.1% | 0.4% | 0.3% |
Where VBIAX and VYM differ
Sector weights as a share of each fund, ordered by the size of the gap rather than the size of the sector — two funds that overlap heavily still usually diverge somewhere.
| Sector | VBIAX | VYM | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unclassified | 55.1% | 0.0% | +55.1pp |
| Treasuries | 19.1% | 0.0% | +19.1pp |
| Financials | 3.6% | 20.9% | −17.3pp |
| Information Technology | 1.0% | 16.7% | −15.8pp |
| Industrials | 0.7% | 13.2% | −12.5pp |
| Health Care | 1.2% | 13.1% | −11.9pp |
| Energy | 0.1% | 8.5% | −8.4pp |
| MBS Pass-Through | 8.1% | 0.0% | +8.1pp |
Δ is VBIAX minus VYM, in percentage points. Sector data is not published by every issuer, so “Unclassified” is a real category rather than a gap in the table.
What each fund holds alone
96.5% of VBIAX by weight, held in no part of VYM.
87.8% of VYM by weight, held in no part of VBIAX.
A large count with a small weight is the usual shape: the positions one fund adds are typically its smallest ones.
Concentration and cost
| VBIAX | VYM | |
|---|---|---|
| Top 10 holdings | 45.2% | 26.0% |
| Positions held | 5,119 | 606 |
| Cost per $10,000 held, per year | $7 | $4 |
Cost is the expense ratio applied to $10,000; it excludes any brokerage commission, bid-ask spread or tax consequence. Figures are facts about the funds, not a suggestion about which to hold.
Frequently asked
How much do VBIAX and VYM overlap?
VBIAX and VYM overlap 3.0% by portfolio weight — largely distinct portfolios. They share 99 holdings. The figure comes from current issuer holdings files (VBIAX as of 2026-03-31, VYM as of 2026-06-30).
How is the overlap between VBIAX and VYM calculated?
As the sum of the smaller weight in each fund, over every holding both funds own: Σ min(wA, wB). If VBIAX holds a stock at 6% and VYM holds the same stock at 4%, 4% counts as shared. The result is bounded between 0% and 100%, and it is computed after looking through any fund-of-funds to the underlying holdings.
Is it redundant to hold both VBIAX and VYM?
That depends on your goals — we state facts, not advice. At 3.0% overlap, each fund still contributes meaningfully distinct exposure.
What does VBIAX own that VYM doesn't?
VBIAX holds 5,119 positions and VYM holds 606; 5,019 of VBIAX's positions don't appear in VYM at all, and they are 96.5% of VBIAX by weight.
You probably hold more than two funds
This page compares VBIAX and VYM. Paste your whole portfolio — brokerage, 401(k), IRA — and see the overlap across every fund at once, plus what you actually own underneath them and your own Effective Funds number. Free, no account, nothing stored.
X-ray my portfolio — free →Watch VBIAX vs VYM
We re-read both funds’ published holdings every weeknight. Leave an address and we'll tell you when what's inside actually changes.
Not sending yet — email alerts are built but switched off, and you'll be among the first when they turn on. No spam, one-click unsubscribe.
Related comparisons
Sources: issuer holdings files, VBIAX as of 2026-03-31, VYM as of 2026-06-30. Weights are fractions of each fund. Diagnostics, not advice.