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 SPY: how they differ

DGRW and SPY hold 51% of their weight in the same names, and SPY returned more over the year.

WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund and SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, DGRW and SPY hold 51% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions DGRW and SPY both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingDGRWSPY
NVIDIA CORP7.95%7.52%
MICROSOFT CORP5.75%4.30%
APPLE INC3.87%6.59%
BROADCOM INC2.34%2.77%
ALPHABET INC2.32%2.59%
ALPHABET INC2.31%3.25%
META PLATFORMS INC2.97%1.92%
ELI LILLY & COMPANY1.53%1.47%
JOHNSON & JOHNSON2.34%0.95%
APPLIED MATERIALS INC1.71%0.89%
VISA INC1.41%0.88%
EXXONMOBIL HOLDINGS CORP1.59%0.88%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in DGRWOnly in SPY
FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 0.28%Amazon.com, Inc. 3.62%
FIRST CITIZENS BANCSHARES INC 0.19%Micron Technology, Inc. 2.02%
RELIANCE INC 0.15%Tesla, Inc. 1.84%
WESCO INTERNATIONAL INC 0.13%Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. 1.47%
TOLL BROTHERS INC 0.13%Berkshire Hathaway, Inc. 1.42%
CARLISLE COMPANIES INC 0.12%JPMorgan Chase & Co. 1.36%
ARAMARK 0.12%Intel Corp. 1.02%
DICKS SPORTING GOODS INC 0.11%Sandisk Corp. 0.52%

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 SPY on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
DGRW
WisdomTree U.S. Quality Dividend Growth Fund
SPY
SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerWisdomTreeState Street
What it isU.S. Quality Dividend GrowthS&P 500, book from IVV
Total return, 1 year+12.4%+17.5%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−5.1 pts0.0 pts
Expense ratio0.28%0.09%
Already in the S&P 50096.7%100.0%
Holdings197504

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%.

SPY in plain words

SPY is an index equity fund tracking the S&P 500. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.5% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.09% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 504 positions, with the top ten at 36.4%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, DGRW or SPY?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DGRW returned +12.4% and SPY returned +17.5%, so SPY returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, DGRW or SPY?
DGRW charges 0.28% a year and SPY charges 0.09%, so SPY is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do DGRW and SPY overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 97% of DGRW and 100% of SPY by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 51% 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 SPY, 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 SPY, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/DGRW-SPY Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources