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

DGRO vs IGM: how they differ

DGRO and IGM hold 17% of their weight in the same names, and IGM returned more over the year.

iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF and iShares Expanded Tech Sector ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, DGRO and IGM hold 17% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions DGRO and IGM both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingDGROIGM
BROADCOM INC3.25%7.61%
APPLE INC2.94%7.92%
MICROSOFT CORP2.92%7.50%
CISCO SYSTEMS INC1.73%2.02%
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORP1.28%1.15%
QUALCOMM INC1.10%0.85%
ORACLE CORP0.81%1.08%
ANALOG DEVICES INC0.54%0.85%
APPLIED MATERIALS INC0.38%2.50%
LAM RESEARCH CORP0.35%2.37%
AMPHENOL CORP0.29%0.95%
KLA CORP0.27%1.72%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in DGROOnly in IGM
JP MORGAN CHASE & COMPANY 3.05%NVIDIA Corp. 7.97%
EXXON MOBIL CORP 2.91%Micron Technology, Inc. 5.47%
JOHNSON & JOHNSON 2.64%Alphabet, Inc. 4.45%
ABBVIE INC 2.53%Meta Platforms, Inc. 4.17%
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC 2.32%Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. 4.13%
PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY (THE) 2.08%Alphabet, Inc. 3.55%
PHILIP MORRIS INTERNATIONAL INC 1.94%Intel Corp. 2.88%
HOME DEPOT INC (THE) 1.90%Sandisk Corp. 1.47%

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 Jun 30, 2026.

DGRO and IGM on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
DGRO
iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF
IGM
iShares Expanded Tech Sector ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isCore Dividend GrowthExpanded Tech Sector
Total return, 1 year+17.4%+32.7%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−0.1 pts+15.2 pts
Expense ratio0.08%0.37%
Already in the S&P 50094.7%92.0%
Holdings394295

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%.

IGM in plain words

IGM is an index equity fund tracking the Expanded Tech Sector. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +32.7% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.37% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 92% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 295 positions, with the top ten at 55.7%. It sat 5.1% below its high of Jun 2, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, DGRO or IGM?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DGRO returned +17.4% and IGM returned +32.7%, so IGM returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, DGRO or IGM?
DGRO charges 0.08% a year and IGM charges 0.37%, so DGRO is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do DGRO and IGM overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 95% of DGRO and 92% of IGM by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 17% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources