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 HDV: how they differ

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

WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund and iShares Core High Dividend ETF.

What they hold in common

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

Positions DGRW and HDV both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingDGRWHDV
COCA-COLA COMPANY (THE)2.88%3.88%
HOME DEPOT INC (THE)2.81%4.08%
JOHNSON & JOHNSON2.34%5.70%
ABBVIE INC2.07%5.45%
EXXONMOBIL HOLDINGS CORP1.59%8.45%
PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY (THE)1.40%4.47%
CHEVRON CORP1.38%6.45%
MERCK & COMPANY INC1.18%3.78%
TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INC0.98%3.55%
QUALCOMM INC0.76%2.38%
ILLINOIS TOOL WORKS INC0.63%0.83%
SYSCO CORP0.33%0.44%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in DGRWOnly in HDV
NVIDIA CORP 7.95%PHILIP MORRIS INTERNATIONAL INC 4.18%
MICROSOFT CORP 5.75%PROGRESSIVE CORP (THE) 3.80%
APPLE INC 3.87%ALTRIA GROUP INC 3.71%
META PLATFORMS INC 2.97%PEPSICO INC 3.67%
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC 2.92%BLACKSTONE INC 2.43%
BROADCOM INC 2.34%US BANCORP 1.69%
ORACLE CORP 2.34%ACCENTURE PLC 1.65%
ALPHABET INC 2.32%DUKE ENERGY CORP 1.57%

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 HDV on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
DGRW
WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund
HDV
iShares Core High Dividend ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerWisdomTreeiShares
What it isU.S. Quality Dividend GrowthCore High Dividend
Total return, 1 year+12.4%+22.5%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−5.1 pts+5.0 pts
Expense ratio0.28%0.08%
Already in the S&P 50096.7%98.0%
Holdings19775

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%.

HDV in plain words

HDV is an index equity fund tracking the Core High Dividend. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +22.5% 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, 98% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 75 positions, with the top ten at 50.2%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, DGRW or HDV?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DGRW returned +12.4% and HDV returned +22.5%, so HDV returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, DGRW or HDV?
DGRW charges 0.28% a year and HDV charges 0.08%, so HDV is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do DGRW and HDV overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 97% of DGRW and 98% of HDV 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources