Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
DGRO vs NOBL: how they differ
DGRO and NOBL hold 21% of their weight in the same names, and DGRO returned more over the year.
iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF and ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, DGRO and NOBL hold 21% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | DGRO | NOBL |
|---|---|---|
| ABBVIE INC | 2.53% | 1.56% |
| COCA-COLA COMPANY (THE) | 1.80% | 1.55% |
| PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY (THE) | 2.08% | 1.48% |
| JOHNSON & JOHNSON | 2.64% | 1.47% |
| EXXON MOBIL CORP | 2.91% | 1.44% |
| PEPSICO INC | 1.70% | 1.37% |
| INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORP | 1.28% | 1.71% |
| NEXTERA ENERGY INC | 1.23% | 1.41% |
| MCDONALD'S CORP | 1.05% | 1.36% |
| WALMART INC | 0.95% | 1.31% |
| CATERPILLAR INC | 0.79% | 1.61% |
| ABBOTT LABORATORIES | 0.79% | 1.36% |
| Only in DGRO | Only in NOBL |
|---|---|
| BROADCOM INC 3.25% | Franklin Resources, Inc. 1.67% |
| JP MORGAN CHASE & COMPANY 3.05% | Hormel Foods Corp. 1.61% |
| APPLE INC 2.94% | JM Smucker Co. (The) 1.58% |
| MICROSOFT CORP 2.92% | Essex Property Trust, Inc. 1.58% |
| UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC 2.32% | Federal Realty Investment Trust 1.58% |
| PHILIP MORRIS INTERNATIONAL INC 1.94% | T. Rowe Price Group, Inc. 1.55% |
| HOME DEPOT INC (THE) 1.90% | Stanley Black & Decker, Inc. 1.53% |
| BANK OF AMERICA CORP 1.84% | Eversource Energy 1.50% |
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.
| DGRO iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF | NOBL ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | ProShares |
| What it is | Core Dividend Growth | S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats |
| Total return, 1 year | +17.4% | +9.4% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −0.1 pts | −8.1 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.08% | 0.35% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 94.7% | 100.0% |
| Holdings | 394 | 69 |
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%.
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, DGRO or NOBL?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DGRO returned +17.4% and NOBL returned +9.4%, so DGRO returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, DGRO or NOBL?
- DGRO charges 0.08% a year and NOBL charges 0.35%, so DGRO is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do DGRO and NOBL overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 95% of DGRO and 100% of NOBL by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 21% 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, DGRO against NOBL, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/DGRO-NOBL Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources