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

GRNY vs NOBL: how they differ

GRNY and NOBL hold 6% of their weight in the same names, and GRNY returned more over the year.

Fundstrat Granny Shots US Large Cap ETF and ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, GRNY and NOBL hold 6% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions GRNY and NOBL both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingGRNYNOBL
Caterpillar Inc2.69%1.61%
PPG Industries Inc1.95%1.50%
Chevron Corp2.46%1.44%
Air Products and Chemicals Inc2.48%1.39%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in GRNYOnly in NOBL
Advanced Micro Devices Inc 4.17%Nucor Corp. 1.77%
Quanta Services Inc 3.20%West Pharmaceutical Services, Inc. 1.73%
GE Vernova Inc 3.05%International Business Machines Corp. 1.71%
Amazon.com Inc 3.02%Archer-Daniels-Midland Co. 1.68%
Strategy Inc 3.01%Franklin Resources, Inc. 1.67%
Alphabet Inc 2.96%Colgate-Palmolive Co. 1.62%
Broadcom Inc 2.94%Automatic Data Processing, Inc. 1.61%
Arista Networks Inc 2.88%Hormel Foods Corp. 1.61%

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 May 31, 2026.

GRNY and NOBL on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
GRNY
Fundstrat Granny Shots US Large Cap ETF
NOBL
ProShares S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerFundstratProShares
What it isFundstrat Granny Shots US Large CapS&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats
Total return, 1 year+13.8%+9.4%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−3.7 pts−8.1 pts
Expense ratio0.75%0.35%
Already in the S&P 50097.0%100.0%
Holdings4069

GRNY in plain words

GRNY is an index equity fund tracking the Fundstrat Granny Shots US Large Cap. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +13.8% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.75% a year. By its holdings filed for Apr 30, 2026, 97% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 40 positions, with the top ten at 30.8%.

NOBL in plain words

NOBL is an index equity fund tracking the S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +9.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.35% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 69 positions, with the top ten at 16.6%. It sat 4.8% below its high of Aug 24, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, GRNY or NOBL?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, GRNY returned +13.8% and NOBL returned +9.4%, so GRNY returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, GRNY or NOBL?
GRNY charges 0.75% a year and NOBL charges 0.35%, so NOBL is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do GRNY and NOBL overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 97% of GRNY and 100% of NOBL by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 6% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources