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

FDVV vs IWD: how they differ

FDVV and IWD hold 29% of their weight in the same names, and IWD returned more over the year.

Fidelity High Dividend ETF and iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, FDVV and IWD hold 29% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions FDVV and IWD both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingFDVVIWD
APPLE INC5.70%5.38%
MICROSOFT CORP4.50%3.89%
JPMORGAN CHASE and CO2.58%2.46%
BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION1.78%0.99%
PROCTER and GAMBLE CO1.81%0.96%
GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC (THE)1.71%0.82%
PHILIP MORRIS INTERNATIONAL INC1.64%0.79%
COCA COLA CO1.85%0.79%
IBM CORPORATION0.90%0.74%
WELLS FARGO and CO1.52%0.71%
META PLATFORMS INC0.74%0.63%
MCDONALDS CORP1.55%0.54%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in FDVVOnly in IWD
NVIDIA CORP 6.86%AMAZON.COM, INC. 5.95%
BROADCOM INC 3.50%BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC. 2.62%
ALPHABET INC 2.21%INTEL CORPORATION 1.72%
ORKLA ASA 1.37%EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION 1.60%
TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INC. 1.32%CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. 1.30%
BANCA MONTE DEI PASCHI DI SIENA SPA 1.26%WALMART INC. 1.28%
DANSKE BANK A/S 1.24%CHEVRON CORPORATION 0.86%
BANCO BPM SPA 1.18%LINDE PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY 0.67%

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.

FDVV and IWD on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
FDVV
Fidelity High Dividend ETF
IWD
iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerFidelityiShares
What it isHigh DividendRussell 1000 value
Total return, 1 year+17.2%+27.4%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−0.3 pts+9.9 pts
Expense ratio0.15%0.18%
Already in the S&P 50086.7%90.2%
Holdings96870

FDVV in plain words

FDVV is an index equity fund tracking the High Dividend. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 87% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 96 positions, with the top ten at 32.5%.

IWD in plain words

IWD is an index equity fund tracking the Russell 1000 value. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +27.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.18% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 90% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 870 positions, with the top ten at 27.9%.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, FDVV or IWD?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, FDVV returned +17.2% and IWD returned +27.4%, so IWD returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, FDVV or IWD?
FDVV charges 0.15% a year and IWD charges 0.18%, so FDVV is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do FDVV and IWD overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 87% of FDVV and 90% of IWD by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 29% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources