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 XLF: how they differ

DGRO and XLF hold 19% of their weight in the same names, and DGRO returned more over the year.

iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF and State Street(R) Financial Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, DGRO and XLF hold 19% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions DGRO and XLF both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingDGROXLF
JP MORGAN CHASE & COMPANY3.05%11.57%
BANK OF AMERICA CORP1.84%4.91%
WELLS FARGO & COMPANY1.29%3.34%
MORGAN STANLEY1.28%3.31%
GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC (THE)1.19%3.94%
CITIGROUP INC1.12%3.15%
VISA INC1.05%7.51%
BLACKROCK INC0.72%1.83%
PNC FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP INC (THE)0.66%1.30%
MASTERCARD INC0.61%5.47%
AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY0.42%2.38%
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORP (THE)0.38%1.31%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in DGROOnly in XLF
BROADCOM INC 3.25%Berkshire Hathaway Inc 12.10%
APPLE INC 2.94%Charles Schwab Corp/The 1.99%
MICROSOFT CORP 2.92%Progressive Corp/The 1.68%
EXXON MOBIL CORP 2.91%Capital One Financial Corp 1.65%
JOHNSON & JOHNSON 2.64%Chubb Ltd 1.62%
ABBVIE INC 2.53%US Bancorp 1.24%
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC 2.32%Blackstone Inc 1.15%
PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY (THE) 2.08%Robinhood Markets Inc 1.05%

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 XLF on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
DGRO
iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF
XLF
State Street(R) Financial Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesState Street
What it isCore Dividend GrowthFinancials
Total return, 1 year+17.4%+7.6%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−0.1 pts−9.9 pts
Expense ratio0.08%0.08%
Already in the S&P 50094.7%100.0%
Holdings39476

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%.

XLF in plain words

XLF is an index equity fund tracking the Financials. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +7.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 76 positions, with the top ten at 57.7%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, DGRO or XLF?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DGRO returned +17.4% and XLF returned +7.6%, so DGRO returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, DGRO or XLF?
DGRO charges 0.08% a year and XLF charges 0.08%, so DGRO is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do DGRO and XLF overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 95% of DGRO and 100% of XLF by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 19% 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 XLF, 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 XLF, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/DGRO-XLF Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources