Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
BIZD and PBDC both invest in business development companies (BDCs), but they use different approaches: BIZD seeks to track a BDC index, while PBDC is actively managed and seeks current income. Neither is a clear winner for every investor. Compare how each is managed, what its reported expenses include, how concentrated its holdings are, and performance over the same period. Yield figures in the available disclosures are from different dates and use different measures, so they do not establish which fund currently yields more.
How BIZD and PBDC choose investments
BIZD: index tracking
VanEck says BIZD seeks to replicate, before fees and expenses, the performance of the MVIS US Business Development Companies Index. Its August 31, 2026 fact sheet reported 33 index constituents and a 73.08% combined weight in the ten largest. VanEck’s holdings page listed 35 holdings as of October 1, 2026; counts can change as the portfolio and reporting dates change. VanEck BIZD fund page · VanEck BIZD fact sheet and fund information
PBDC: active management
PBDC seeks current income and invests mainly in BDCs. Franklin Templeton’s June 30, 2026 fact sheet classified it as actively managed, listed 22 issuers, and named Mike Petro, CFA, as portfolio manager. The September 1, 2026 summary prospectus says the manager assesses credit performance and risk, earnings and dividend prospects, interest-rate effects, leverage, balance sheets, valuation, financial strength, cash flows, and market conditions. Franklin Templeton PBDC fund page · PBDC summary prospectus filed with the SEC
The practical distinction is between seeking index exposure and relying on a manager’s selections. Active management may produce different weights and returns, but the fact that a fund is active does not establish that it will outperform.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →What the expense ratios include
These funds invest in BDCs, whose own operating expenses are reflected in acquired fund fees and expenses (AFFEs). AFFEs are included in the reported total expense figure, but they are indirect costs of the underlying BDCs—not simply an additional cash fee deducted from an ETF holder’s account in the same way as the ETF’s management fee. The management fee is the more direct fee charged by the ETF.
| Fund and disclosure | Management fee | Other expenses | AFFEs | Reported total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BIZD, VanEck fact sheet as of August 31, 2026 | 0.40% | 0.02% | 9.27% | 9.69% gross and net expense ratio |
| PBDC, Franklin Templeton fact sheet as of June 30, 2026 | 0.75% | Not stated in this fact sheet | 12.74% | 13.49% total expense ratio |
| PBDC, SEC summary prospectus dated September 1, 2026 | 0.75% | 0.00% | 11.02% | 11.77% total annual fund operating expenses |
VanEck’s October 2, 2026 fund page also reported BIZD’s total expense ratio as 9.69%. PBDC’s June fact sheet and September SEC prospectus report different AFFE estimates and totals; keep the document dates in view rather than combining the figures or treating either as a timeless amount. Check the latest prospectus and fee disclosures before investing. VanEck BIZD disclosures · Franklin Templeton PBDC disclosures · PBDC SEC summary prospectus
Why the yield figures do not identify a winner
Yield measures answer different questions. A 30-day SEC yield is a standardized measure based on recent portfolio income; a distribution yield relates a fund’s distributions to its share price; a 12-month yield reflects distributions over a trailing year. Distributions can change, and none of these measures guarantees an investor’s return.
- BIZD: VanEck reported a 9.74% 30-day SEC yield, 14.20% distribution yield, and 12.67% 12-month yield on October 2, 2026. Its fact sheet dated August 31, 2026 reported a 9.27% 30-day SEC yield and 11.28% 12-month yield. VanEck says distributions are quarterly and may vary.
- PBDC: Franklin Templeton reported a 10.55% 30-day SEC yield as of June 30, 2026.
These snapshots are not synchronized, and BIZD’s own SEC yield, distribution yield, and trailing yield differ. Do not compare PBDC’s June SEC yield with BIZD’s October distribution yield to declare a current yield winner. For a decision, compare the latest disclosures using the same yield definition and review distribution notices for changes. VanEck BIZD yield and distribution information · Franklin Templeton PBDC yield information
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Rank #3
Holdings overlap, but concentration differs
Both funds hold major BDC names, but their reported weights and issuer counts differ. The snapshots below are from different dates, so they show reported portfolios rather than a synchronized comparison of current allocations.
| Fund and date | Reported holdings or issuers | Largest reported positions |
|---|---|---|
| BIZD, VanEck holdings page, October 1, 2026 | 35 holdings | Ares Capital 14.08%; Main Street Capital 5.38%; Blue Owl Capital 5.33%; Blackstone Secured Lending 5.13% |
| PBDC, Franklin Templeton fact sheet, June 30, 2026 | 22 issuers | Ares Capital 11.13%; Blue Owl Capital 10.23%; Blue Owl Technology Finance 10.21%; Hercules Capital 7.74%; Golub Capital 7.55% |
BIZD’s August 31, 2026 fact sheet reported that its ten largest index constituents represented 73.08% of the index. The five PBDC positions listed above together represented 46.86% of the portfolio on June 30, 2026; the fact sheet’s ten largest positions accounted for roughly three quarters when their listed weights are summed. Those figures indicate meaningful concentration in both portfolios. They are not broad-market funds, and their exposure remains focused on the BDC and financials area. VanEck BIZD holdings · Franklin Templeton PBDC holdings
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Matched-period performance
For the three years ended June 30, 2026, BIZD returned 5.18% annualized at NAV, and PBDC returned 6.98% annualized at NAV, according to their respective official fact sheets. BIZD’s fact sheet also reported a 5.36% annualized return for its index over that quarter-end reporting period, before fund fees and brokerage expenses. This is a matched historical period, not a forecast or evidence that PBDC will continue to outperform.
The funds also have different histories: BIZD began on February 11, 2013, while PBDC began on September 29, 2022. A three-year comparison does not capture BIZD’s longer record or establish how either fund may perform in different credit or interest-rate conditions. VanEck BIZD performance and inception date · Franklin Templeton PBDC performance and inception date
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Best Value
Risks that come with both funds
A BDC ETF is a basket of BDCs, not a way to remove the risks of lending to smaller or less-established businesses. VanEck notes that BDCs generally invest in less mature private companies or thinly traded public companies, which can carry greater risk than investments in established public companies. A diversified basket may spread exposure across issuers, but it cannot eliminate the risks shared by the sector.
PBDC’s September 1, 2026 SEC summary prospectus describes several relevant risks:
- Credit risk: Borrowers may fail to meet payment obligations or weaken financially.
- Interest-rate risk: Floating-rate asset income can decline when rates fall.
- Leverage: Borrowing can magnify gains and losses.
- Valuation and liquidity: Some BDC assets are difficult to value, and market prices can diverge from reported net asset value.
- Underlying expenses: PBDC indirectly bears its share of BDC management, operating, and incentive fees in addition to its own management fee.
These risks can affect income, share prices, and fund performance; a high distribution yield should not be treated as a guaranteed return or a stand-alone measure of fund quality. PBDC SEC summary prospectus · VanEck BIZD fact sheet
How to decide which is a better fit
- Consider BIZD if you prefer a fund that seeks to track a defined BDC index and want index-based exposure, while accepting that the index itself is concentrated in BDCs.
- Consider PBDC if you prefer active selection and current-income objectives, and are comfortable evaluating manager decisions, the available performance history, and the expense disclosures.
- Compare before buying using the latest prospectuses, holdings, standardized yields, distribution notices, and expense figures. Make the comparison on aligned dates and the same definitions.
- Assess portfolio fit by considering whether sector-specific credit, leverage, valuation, rate, and liquidity risks suit your goals and ability to tolerate losses.
These are different approaches to the same specialized sector, not substitutes for diversified stock-and-bond exposure. The appropriate choice depends on which management approach and portfolio risks you are willing to accept.
Recommended Free Tools
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
