Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

CGDV vs DFUS: how they differ

CGDV and DFUS hold 35% of their weight in the same names, and CGDV returned more over the year.

Capital Group Dividend Value ETF and Dimensional U.S. Equity Market ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, CGDV and DFUS hold 35% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions CGDV and DFUS both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingCGDVDFUS
NVIDIA Corp5.66%6.97%
Microsoft Corp5.81%4.52%
Alphabet Inc3.60%3.31%
Broadcom Inc5.16%2.90%
Apple Inc2.36%5.86%
Meta Platforms Inc3.33%2.01%
Amazon.com Inc1.88%3.84%
JPMorgan Chase & Co1.90%1.26%
Eli Lilly & Co3.15%1.13%
Exxon Mobil Corp1.34%0.97%
Intel Corp1.09%0.68%
Mastercard Inc1.30%0.63%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in CGDVOnly in DFUS
Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd 2.83%ALPHABET INC. 2.74%
British American Tobacco PLC 2.66%TESLA, INC. 1.78%
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Lt 2.17%BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC. 1.30%
Capital Group Central Cash Fund 2.02%MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. 0.89%
Linde PLC 1.95%WALMART INC. 0.87%
Seagate Technology Holdings PLC 1.42%ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC. 0.86%
TC Energy Corp 1.33%JOHNSON & JOHNSON 0.83%
Medtronic PLC 1.07%VISA INC. 0.83%

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 Apr 30, 2026 and May 31, 2026.

CGDV and DFUS on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
CGDV
Capital Group Dividend Value ETF
DFUS
Dimensional U.S. Equity Market ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerCapitalDimensional
What it isDividend ValueU.S. Equity Market
Total return, 1 year+18.7%+17.5%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+1.2 pts0.0 pts
Expense ratio0.33%0.09%
Already in the S&P 50091.0%90.2%
Holdings532231

CGDV in plain words

CGDV is an index equity fund tracking the Dividend Value. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +18.7% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.33% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 91% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 53 positions, with the top ten at 38.8%. It sat 4.0% below its high of Aug 13, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

DFUS in plain words

DFUS is an index equity fund tracking the U.S. Equity Market. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.5% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.09% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 90% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 2231 positions, with the top ten at 35.2%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, CGDV or DFUS?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, CGDV returned +18.7% and DFUS returned +17.5%, so CGDV returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, CGDV or DFUS?
CGDV charges 0.33% a year and DFUS charges 0.09%, so DFUS is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do CGDV and DFUS overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 91% of CGDV and 90% of DFUS by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 35% 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.

CGDV against DFUS, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. Every figure is arithmetic on a named public source; the method is at etfiq.com/methodology. A comparison is not a recommendation.

Cite this page. ETFIQ, CGDV against DFUS, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/CGDV-DFUS Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources