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 QQQ: how they differ

DGRW and QQQ hold 40% of their weight in the same names, and QQQ returned more over the year.

WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund and Invesco QQQ Trust.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, DGRW and QQQ hold 40% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions DGRW and QQQ both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingDGRWQQQ
NVIDIA CORP7.95%8.16%
MICROSOFT CORP5.75%5.32%
APPLE INC3.87%7.29%
META PLATFORMS INC2.97%2.97%
BROADCOM INC2.34%3.37%
ALPHABET INC2.32%3.26%
ALPHABET INC2.31%3.52%
APPLIED MATERIALS INC1.71%1.57%
CISCO SYSTEMS INC1.44%2.09%
TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INC0.98%1.22%
WALMART INC0.94%2.48%
T-MOBILE US INC1.48%0.91%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in DGRWOnly in QQQ
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC 2.92%Micron Technology, Inc. 4.80%
COCA-COLA COMPANY (THE) 2.88%Amazon.com, Inc. 4.62%
HOME DEPOT INC (THE) 2.81%Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. 3.70%
JOHNSON & JOHNSON 2.34%Tesla, Inc. 3.46%
ORACLE CORP 2.34%Intel Corp. 2.52%
ABBVIE INC 2.07%Netflix, Inc. 1.59%
CATERPILLAR INC 1.80%Palantir Technologies Inc. 1.58%
EXXONMOBIL HOLDINGS CORP 1.59%Sandisk Corp. 1.10%

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 and May 31, 2026.

DGRW and QQQ on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
DGRW
WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund
QQQ
Invesco QQQ Trust
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerWisdomTreeInvesco
What it isU.S. Quality Dividend GrowthNasdaq-100, book from QQQM
Total return, 1 year+12.4%+23.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−5.1 pts+5.5 pts
Expense ratio0.28%0.18%
Already in the S&P 50096.7%96.7%
Holdings197101

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%.

QQQ in plain words

QQQ is an index equity fund tracking the Nasdaq-100. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +23.0% 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 May 31, 2026, 97% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 101 positions, with the top ten at 47.5%. It sat 4.1% below its high of Jun 2, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, DGRW or QQQ?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DGRW returned +12.4% and QQQ returned +23.0%, so QQQ returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, DGRW or QQQ?
DGRW charges 0.28% a year and QQQ charges 0.18%, so QQQ is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do DGRW and QQQ overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 97% of DGRW and 97% of QQQ by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 40% 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 QQQ, 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 QQQ, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/DGRW-QQQ Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources