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 IWD: how they differ

DGRW and IWD hold 36% of their weight in the same names, and IWD returned more over the year.

WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund and iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, DGRW and IWD hold 36% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions DGRW and IWD both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingDGRWIWD
MICROSOFT CORP5.75%3.89%
APPLE INC3.87%5.38%
JOHNSON & JOHNSON2.34%1.72%
EXXONMOBIL HOLDINGS CORP1.59%1.60%
CISCO SYSTEMS INC1.44%1.30%
ABBVIE INC2.07%1.15%
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC2.92%1.05%
BANK OF AMERICA CORP0.99%0.99%
PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY (THE)1.40%0.96%
WALMART INC0.94%1.28%
MERCK & COMPANY INC1.18%0.89%
CHEVRON CORP1.38%0.86%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in DGRWOnly in IWD
NVIDIA CORP 7.95%AMAZON.COM, INC. 5.95%
BROADCOM INC 2.34%BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC. 2.62%
ORACLE CORP 2.34%JPMORGAN CHASE & CO. 2.46%
ALPHABET INC 2.32%INTEL CORPORATION 1.72%
ALPHABET INC 2.31%THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. 0.82%
CATERPILLAR INC 1.80%Philip Morris International Inc. 0.79%
APPLIED MATERIALS INC 1.71%RTX CORPORATION 0.72%
ELI LILLY & COMPANY 1.53%WELLS FARGO & COMPANY 0.71%

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 Jun 30, 2026.

DGRW and IWD on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
DGRW
WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund
IWD
iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerWisdomTreeiShares
What it isU.S. Quality Dividend GrowthRussell 1000 value
Total return, 1 year+12.4%+27.4%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−5.1 pts+9.9 pts
Expense ratio0.28%0.18%
Already in the S&P 50096.7%90.2%
Holdings197870

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%.

IWD in plain words

IWD is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 1000 value. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +27.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.18% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 90% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 870 positions, with the top ten at 27.9%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, DGRW or IWD?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DGRW returned +12.4% and IWD returned +27.4%, so IWD returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, DGRW or IWD?
DGRW charges 0.28% a year and IWD charges 0.18%, so IWD is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do DGRW and IWD overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 97% of DGRW and 90% of IWD by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 36% 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 IWD, 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 IWD, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/DGRW-IWD Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources