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 XOVR: how they differ

DYNF and XOVR hold 17% of their weight in the same names, and DYNF returned more over the year.

iShares U.S. Equity Factor Rotation Active ETF and ERShares Private-Public Crossover ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, DYNF and XOVR hold 17% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions DYNF and XOVR both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingDYNFXOVR
NVIDIA Corp8.62%9.48%
Alphabet Inc2.87%6.53%
Meta Platforms Inc2.50%4.47%
Tesla Inc1.74%1.63%
Palantir Technologies Inc1.17%0.56%
AppLovin Corp0.29%3.95%
Robinhood Markets Inc0.07%3.56%
Rocket Lab Corp0.04%2.50%
Astera Labs Inc0.03%7.75%
Exelixis Inc0.02%1.89%
Virtu Financial Inc0.02%1.86%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in DYNFOnly in XOVR
Apple Inc 7.75%Natera Inc 3.70%
Microsoft Corp 5.35%Veeva Systems Inc 3.17%
Amazon.com Inc 4.42%Reddit Inc 2.78%
JPMorgan Chase & Co 3.59%Affirm Holdings Inc 2.64%
Broadcom Inc 3.25%Axon Enterprise Inc 2.60%
Cisco Systems Inc 2.76%Arista Networks Inc 2.31%
Lam Research Corp 2.71%Mongodb Inc 2.29%
Berkshire Hathaway Inc 2.38%Roku Inc 2.16%

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 and Jun 30, 2026.

DYNF and XOVR on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
DYNF
iShares U.S. Equity Factor Rotation Active ETF
XOVR
ERShares Private-Public Crossover ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesERShares
What it isU.S. Equity Factor Rotation ActivePrivate-Public Crossover
Total return, 1 year+20.8%0.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+3.3 pts−17.5 pts
Expense ratio0.26%0.75%
Already in the S&P 50098.8%43.4%
Holdings18732

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%.

XOVR in plain words

XOVR is an index equity fund tracking the Private-Public Crossover. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned 0.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.75% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 43% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 32 positions, with the top ten at 63.1%. It sat 4.2% below its high of Oct 27, 2025 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, DYNF or XOVR?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DYNF returned +20.8% and XOVR returned 0.0%, so DYNF returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, DYNF or XOVR?
DYNF charges 0.26% a year and XOVR charges 0.75%, so DYNF is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do DYNF and XOVR overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 99% of DYNF and 43% of XOVR by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 17% 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 XOVR, 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 XOVR, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/DYNF-XOVR Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources