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

DGRW vs FDVV: how they differ

DGRW and FDVV hold 35% of their weight in the same names, and FDVV returned more over the year.

WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund and Fidelity High Dividend ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, DGRW and FDVV hold 35% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions DGRW and FDVV both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingDGRWFDVV
NVIDIA CORP7.95%6.86%
MICROSOFT CORP5.75%4.50%
APPLE INC3.87%5.70%
BROADCOM INC2.34%3.50%
ALPHABET INC2.31%2.21%
COCA-COLA COMPANY (THE)2.88%1.85%
HOME DEPOT INC (THE)2.81%1.66%
MCDONALD'S CORP1.57%1.55%
PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY (THE)1.40%1.81%
BANK OF AMERICA CORP0.99%1.78%
TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INC0.98%1.32%
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORP1.59%0.90%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in DGRWOnly in FDVV
ORACLE CORP 2.34%JPMORGAN CHASE and CO 2.58%
ALPHABET INC 2.32%GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC (THE) 1.71%
APPLIED MATERIALS INC 1.71%ALTRIA GROUP INC 1.70%
EXXONMOBIL HOLDINGS CORP 1.59%STARBUCKS CORP 1.66%
CISCO SYSTEMS INC 1.44%PHILIP MORRIS INTERNATIONAL INC 1.64%
VISA INC 1.41%PEPSICO INC 1.63%
CHEVRON CORP 1.38%WELLS FARGO and CO 1.52%
GILEAD SCIENCES INC 1.25%DELL TECHNOLOGIES INC 1.44%

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.

DGRW and FDVV on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
DGRW
WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund
FDVV
Fidelity High Dividend ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerWisdomTreeFidelity
What it isU.S. Quality Dividend GrowthHigh Dividend
Total return, 1 year+12.4%+17.2%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−5.1 pts−0.3 pts
Expense ratio0.28%0.15%
Already in the S&P 50096.7%86.7%
Holdings19796

DGRW in plain words

DGRW is an index equity fund tracking the U.S. Quality Dividend Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +12.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.28% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 97% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 197 positions, with the top ten at 36.2%.

FDVV in plain words

FDVV is an index equity fund tracking the High Dividend. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 87% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 96 positions, with the top ten at 32.5%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, DGRW or FDVV?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DGRW returned +12.4% and FDVV returned +17.2%, so FDVV returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, DGRW or FDVV?
DGRW charges 0.28% a year and FDVV charges 0.15%, so FDVV is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do DGRW and FDVV overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 97% of DGRW and 87% of FDVV by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 35% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources