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 VO: how they differ

DGRO and VO hold 15% of their weight in the same names, and DGRO returned more over the year.

iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF and Vanguard Mid-Cap Index Fund.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, DGRO and VO hold 15% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions DGRO and VO both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingDGROVO
PHILLIPS 660.50%0.66%
SEMPRA0.38%0.59%
AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY INC0.45%0.36%
FIFTH THIRD BANCORP0.35%0.50%
FEDEX CORP0.32%0.33%
AIR PRODUCTS AND CHEMICALS INC0.39%0.32%
METLIFE INC0.32%0.45%
MICROCHIP TECHNOLOGY INC0.31%0.48%
XCEL ENERGY INC0.30%0.49%
CUMMINS INC0.30%0.95%
ENTERGY CORP0.29%0.53%
CONSOLIDATED EDISON INC0.28%0.40%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in DGROOnly in VO
BROADCOM INC 3.25%Vertiv Holdings Co 1.23%
JP MORGAN CHASE & COMPANY 3.05%Western Digital Corp 1.07%
APPLE INC 2.94%Seagate Technology Holdings PLC 1.05%
MICROSOFT CORP 2.92%Datadog Inc 0.84%
EXXON MOBIL CORP 2.91%Bloom Energy Corp 0.79%
JOHNSON & JOHNSON 2.64%Constellation Energy Corp 0.78%
ABBVIE INC 2.53%Robinhood Markets Inc 0.77%
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC 2.32%Cloudflare Inc 0.76%

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 VO on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
DGRO
iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF
VO
Vanguard Mid-Cap Index Fund
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesVanguard
What it isCore Dividend GrowthMid-Cap
Total return, 1 year+17.4%+12.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−0.1 pts−5.5 pts
Expense ratio0.08%0.03%
Already in the S&P 50094.7%91.4%
Holdings394282

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%.

VO in plain words

VO is an index equity fund tracking the Mid-Cap. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +12.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.03% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 91% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 282 positions, with the top ten at 9.6%. It sat 4.1% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, DGRO or VO?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DGRO returned +17.4% and VO returned +12.0%, so DGRO returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, DGRO or VO?
DGRO charges 0.08% a year and VO charges 0.03%, so VO is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do DGRO and VO overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 95% of DGRO and 91% of VO by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 15% 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 VO, 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 VO, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/DGRO-VO Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources