Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
DGRW vs IWF: how they differ
DGRW and IWF hold 42% of their weight in the same names, and DGRW returned more over the year.
WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund and iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, DGRW and IWF hold 42% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | DGRW | IWF |
|---|---|---|
| NVIDIA CORP | 7.95% | 13.85% |
| MICROSOFT CORP | 5.75% | 4.11% |
| APPLE INC | 3.87% | 6.72% |
| META PLATFORMS INC | 2.97% | 3.01% |
| BROADCOM INC | 2.34% | 5.21% |
| ALPHABET INC | 2.32% | 4.98% |
| ALPHABET INC | 2.31% | 6.18% |
| APPLIED MATERIALS INC | 1.71% | 1.70% |
| ELI LILLY & COMPANY | 1.53% | 2.84% |
| CATERPILLAR INC | 1.80% | 1.44% |
| VISA INC | 1.41% | 1.68% |
| LAM RESEARCH CORP | 0.90% | 1.61% |
| Only in DGRW | Only in IWF |
|---|---|
| UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC 2.92% | MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. 3.86% |
| JOHNSON & JOHNSON 2.34% | TESLA, INC. 3.65% |
| EXXONMOBIL HOLDINGS CORP 1.59% | ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC. 2.80% |
| INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORP 1.59% | SANDISK CORPORATION 0.98% |
| MCDONALD'S CORP 1.57% | GE VERNOVA INC. 0.94% |
| T-MOBILE US INC 1.48% | NETFLIX, INC. 0.89% |
| CISCO SYSTEMS INC 1.44% | PALO ALTO NETWORKS, INC. 0.82% |
| PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY (THE) 1.40% | MARVELL TECHNOLOGY, INC. 0.77% |
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 WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund | IWF iShares Russell 1000 Growth ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | WisdomTree | iShares |
| What it is | U.S. Quality Dividend Growth | Russell 1000 growth |
| Total return, 1 year | +12.4% | +7.0% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | −5.1 pts | −10.5 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.28% | 0.18% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 96.7% | 93.6% |
| Holdings | 197 | 368 |
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%.
IWF in plain words
IWF is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 1000 growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +7.0% 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, 94% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 368 positions, with the top ten at 54.4%. It sat 5.0% below its high of Jun 1, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, DGRW or IWF?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DGRW returned +12.4% and IWF returned +7.0%, so DGRW returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, DGRW or IWF?
- DGRW charges 0.28% a year and IWF charges 0.18%, so IWF is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do DGRW and IWF overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 97% of DGRW and 94% of IWF by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 42% 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, DGRW against IWF, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/DGRW-IWF Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources