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

COWZ vs DGRO: how they differ

COWZ and DGRO hold 8% of their weight in the same names, and COWZ returned more over the year.

Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF and iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, COWZ and DGRO hold 8% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions COWZ and DGRO both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingCOWZDGRO
QUALCOMM Inc2.67%1.10%
ConocoPhillips2.17%0.99%
Gilead Sciences Inc1.84%0.78%
Accenture PLC1.68%0.76%
Automatic Data Processing Inc1.31%0.58%
EOG Resources Inc1.23%0.53%
Colgate-Palmolive Co1.10%0.34%
Intuit Inc1.63%0.24%
Archer-Daniels-Midland Co1.55%0.23%
Diamondback Energy Inc1.99%0.18%
PACCAR Inc0.99%0.15%
Constellation Brands Inc0.63%0.14%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in COWZOnly in DGRO
Altria Group Inc 2.21%BROADCOM INC 3.25%
CVS Health Corp 2.16%JP MORGAN CHASE & COMPANY 3.05%
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co 2.03%APPLE INC 2.94%
Ford Motor Co 2.01%MICROSOFT CORP 2.92%
Uber Technologies Inc 2.01%EXXON MOBIL CORP 2.91%
Pfizer Inc 2.00%JOHNSON & JOHNSON 2.64%
Newmont Corp 1.93%ABBVIE INC 2.53%
Verizon Communications Inc 1.90%UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC 2.32%

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.

COWZ and DGRO on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
COWZ
Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF
DGRO
iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerPaceriShares
What it isUS Cash Cows 100Core Dividend Growth
Total return, 1 year+23.4%+17.4%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+5.9 pts−0.1 pts
Expense ratio0.49%0.08%
Already in the S&P 50095.8%94.7%
Holdings100394

COWZ in plain words

COWZ is an index equity fund tracking the US Cash Cows 100. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +23.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.49% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 96% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 100 positions, with the top ten at 21.2%. It sat 3.2% below its high of Sep 3, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

DGRO in plain words

DGRO is an index equity fund tracking the Core Dividend Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.08% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 95% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 394 positions, with the top ten at 26.6%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, COWZ or DGRO?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, COWZ returned +23.4% and DGRO returned +17.4%, so COWZ returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, COWZ or DGRO?
COWZ charges 0.49% a year and DGRO charges 0.08%, so DGRO is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do COWZ and DGRO overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 96% of COWZ and 95% of DGRO by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 8% 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.

COWZ against DGRO, 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, COWZ against DGRO, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/COWZ-DGRO Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources