Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
AVLV vs NOBL: how they differ
AVLV and NOBL hold 7% of their weight in the same names, and AVLV returned more over the year.
Avantis U.S. Large Cap Value ETF and ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, AVLV and NOBL hold 7% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | AVLV | NOBL |
|---|---|---|
| Caterpillar Inc | 2.53% | 1.61% |
| Exxon Mobil Corp | 2.59% | 1.44% |
| Walmart Inc | 0.89% | 1.31% |
| Target Corp | 0.83% | 1.41% |
| WW Grainger Inc | 0.75% | 1.55% |
| Expeditors International of Washington I | 0.40% | 1.54% |
| T Rowe Price Group Inc | 0.29% | 1.55% |
| Archer-Daniels-Midland Co | 0.24% | 1.68% |
| Automatic Data Processing Inc | 0.12% | 1.61% |
| A O Smith Corp | 0.06% | 1.28% |
| Erie Indemnity Co | 0.03% | 1.23% |
| FactSet Research Systems Inc | 0.02% | 1.50% |
| Only in AVLV | Only in NOBL |
|---|---|
| Micron Technology Inc 4.57% | Nucor Corp. 1.77% |
| Amazon.com Inc 3.18% | West Pharmaceutical Services, Inc. 1.73% |
| Apple Inc 3.17% | International Business Machines Corp. 1.71% |
| Meta Platforms Inc 2.74% | Franklin Resources, Inc. 1.67% |
| Lam Research Corp 2.52% | Colgate-Palmolive Co. 1.62% |
| Costco Wholesale Corp 2.06% | Hormel Foods Corp. 1.61% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co 1.79% | JM Smucker Co. (The) 1.58% |
| Merck & Co Inc 1.75% | Essex Property Trust, Inc. 1.58% |
Weight overlap is an ETFIQ calculation: for every security both funds hold, the smaller of the two weights, summed. Above 50%, holding both is close to holding one of them twice. Holdings dated May 31, 2026.
| AVLV Avantis U.S. Large Cap Value ETF | NOBL ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | Avantis | ProShares |
| What it is | U.S. Large Cap Value | S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats |
| Total return, 1 year | +31.0% | +9.4% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +13.5 pts | −8.1 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.15% | 0.35% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 84.5% | 100.0% |
| Holdings | 275 | 69 |
AVLV in plain words
AVLV is an index equity fund tracking the U.S. Large Cap Value. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +31.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 84% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 275 positions, with the top ten at 26.9%.
NOBL in plain words
NOBL is an index equity fund tracking the S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +9.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.35% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 69 positions, with the top ten at 16.6%. It sat 4.8% below its high of Aug 24, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, AVLV or NOBL?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, AVLV returned +31.0% and NOBL returned +9.4%, so AVLV returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, AVLV or NOBL?
- AVLV charges 0.15% a year and NOBL charges 0.35%, so AVLV is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do AVLV and NOBL overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 84% of AVLV and 100% of NOBL by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 7% of their books are the same securities at the same weight.
Other comparisons
Where to next
Where these figures came from
ETFIQ links to the documents behind every figure. It is not affiliated with any issuer, and a link is not an endorsement.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, AVLV against NOBL, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/AVLV-NOBL Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources