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

DYNF vs HDV: how they differ

DYNF and HDV hold 7% of their weight in the same names, and HDV returned more over the year.

iShares U.S. Equity Factor Rotation Active ETF and iShares Core High Dividend ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, DYNF and HDV hold 7% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions DYNF and HDV both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingDYNFHDV
Exxon Mobil Corp1.93%8.45%
Johnson & Johnson1.92%5.70%
Duke Energy Corp1.63%1.57%
Philip Morris International Inc0.39%4.18%
Progressive Corp/The0.34%3.80%
AbbVie Inc0.27%5.45%
Home Depot Inc/The0.23%4.08%
Texas Instruments Inc0.04%3.55%
American Electric Power Co Inc0.03%0.98%
Procter & Gamble Co/The0.00%4.47%
Altria Group Inc0.00%3.71%
Southern Co/The0.00%1.55%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in DYNFOnly in HDV
NVIDIA Corp 8.62%CHEVRON CORP 6.45%
Apple Inc 7.75%COCA-COLA COMPANY (THE) 3.88%
Microsoft Corp 5.35%MERCK & COMPANY INC 3.78%
Amazon.com Inc 4.42%PEPSICO INC 3.67%
JPMorgan Chase & Co 3.59%BLACKSTONE INC 2.43%
Broadcom Inc 3.25%QUALCOMM INC 2.38%
Alphabet Inc 2.87%CONOCOPHILLIPS 2.14%
Cisco Systems Inc 2.76%US BANCORP 1.69%

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.

DYNF and HDV on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
DYNF
iShares U.S. Equity Factor Rotation Active ETF
HDV
iShares Core High Dividend ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isU.S. Equity Factor Rotation ActiveCore High Dividend
Total return, 1 year+20.8%+22.5%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+3.3 pts+5.0 pts
Expense ratio0.26%0.08%
Already in the S&P 50098.8%98.0%
Holdings18775

DYNF in plain words

DYNF is an index equity fund tracking the U.S. Equity Factor Rotation Active. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +20.8% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.26% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 99% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 187 positions, with the top ten at 43.8%.

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, DYNF or HDV?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DYNF returned +20.8% and HDV returned +22.5%, so HDV returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, DYNF or HDV?
DYNF charges 0.26% a year and HDV charges 0.08%, so HDV is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do DYNF and HDV overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 99% of DYNF and 98% of HDV by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 7% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources