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 XYLD: how they differ

Over the year DGRO and XYLD finished level, +17.4% against +17.9%, and DGRO charges 0.08% against 0.60%.

iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF and Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, DGRO and XYLD hold 34% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions DGRO and XYLD both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingDGROXYLD
BROADCOM INC3.25%3.20%
MICROSOFT CORP2.92%4.90%
JP MORGAN CHASE & COMPANY3.05%1.37%
ELI LILLY & COMPANY1.14%1.20%
EXXON MOBIL CORP2.91%1.04%
WALMART INC0.95%0.94%
VISA INC1.05%0.90%
JOHNSON & JOHNSON2.64%0.90%
CATERPILLAR INC0.79%0.67%
MASTERCARD INC0.61%0.66%
ABBVIE INC2.53%0.60%
CISCO SYSTEMS INC1.73%0.58%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in DGROOnly in XYLD
APPLE INC 2.94%NVIDIA CORPORATION 7.85%
BANK OF AMERICA CORP 1.84%APPLE INC. 6.45%
AMGEN INC 1.11%AMAZON.COM, INC. 4.19%
ABBOTT LABORATORIES 0.79%ALPHABET INC. 3.63%
ACCENTURE PLC 0.76%ALPHABET INC. 2.89%
MEDTRONIC PLC 0.72%META PLATFORMS, INC. 2.17%
RTX CORP 0.69%TESLA, INC. 1.74%
LINDE PLC 0.65%BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC. 1.41%

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.

DGRO and XYLD on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
DGRO
iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF
XYLD
Global X S&P 500 Covered Call ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundIncome ETF
IssueriSharesGlobal X
What it isCore Dividend Growthcovered call, vs ACWI
Total return, 1 year+17.4%+17.9%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+19.1%
Gap to the S&P 500−0.1 pts−1.2 pts
Cash paid, 1 yearnot an income fund11.0%
Expense ratio0.08%0.60%
Holdings394not filed

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%.

XYLD in plain words

Over the year to Sep 11, 2026, XYLD paid 11.0% of its starting value in cash distributions while its price rose 5.9%. With every distribution reinvested, the fund returned +17.9%. All-country world (ACWI) returned +19.1% over the same days, so a holder was behind by 1.2 pts. At its price on Sep 11, 2026 the latest distribution annualizes to 9.0%, paid monthly. Global X estimates that 93% of the distribution paid Aug 27, 2026 was a return of capital (19a-1 notice, estimated, a tax characterization rather than a measure of erosion).

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, DGRO or XYLD?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DGRO returned +17.4% and XYLD returned +17.9%, so XYLD returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, DGRO or XYLD?
DGRO charges 0.08% a year and XYLD charges 0.60%, so DGRO is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
Are DGRO and XYLD the same kind of fund?
No. DGRO is an index ETF and XYLD is an option-income ETF, so they are built for different jobs. The table compares what both publish: return, cost and what each actually holds.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources