Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
IWD vs RDVY: how they differ
IWD and RDVY hold 14% of their weight in the same names, and IWD returned more over the year.
iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF and First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, IWD and RDVY hold 14% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | IWD | RDVY |
|---|---|---|
| JPMORGAN CHASE & CO. | 2.46% | 1.91% |
| MICROSOFT CORPORATION | 3.89% | 1.45% |
| APPLE INC. | 5.38% | 1.44% |
| BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION | 0.99% | 1.96% |
| WELLS FARGO & COMPANY | 0.71% | 0.97% |
| COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION | 0.66% | 1.73% |
| META PLATFORMS, INC. | 0.63% | 1.50% |
| CITIGROUP INC. | 0.57% | 0.54% |
| ABBOTT LABORATORIES | 0.44% | 0.58% |
| THE CHARLES SCHWAB CORPORATION | 0.39% | 0.95% |
| THE PROGRESSIVE CORPORATION | 0.36% | 0.77% |
| AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY | 0.36% | 1.82% |
| Only in IWD | Only in RDVY |
|---|---|
| AMAZON.COM, INC. 5.95% | APPLIED MATERIALS INC 4.69% |
| BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC. 2.62% | LAM RESEARCH CORP 4.42% |
| INTEL CORPORATION 1.72% | KLA CORP 4.14% |
| JOHNSON & JOHNSON 1.72% | GE VERNOVA INC 2.80% |
| EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION 1.60% | GE AEROSPACE 2.13% |
| CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. 1.30% | ALPHABET INC 2.12% |
| WALMART INC. 1.28% | CHUBB LTD (SWITZERLAND) 1.97% |
| ABBVIE INC. 1.15% | NVIDIA CORP 1.91% |
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.
| IWD iShares Russell 1000 Value ETF | RDVY First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | iShares | First Trust |
| What it is | Russell 1000 value | First Rising Dividend Achievers |
| Total return, 1 year | +27.4% | +22.0% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +9.9 pts | +4.5 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.18% | 0.47% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 90.2% | 94.4% |
| Holdings | 870 | 71 |
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%.
RDVY in plain words
RDVY is an index equity fund tracking the First Rising Dividend Achievers. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +22.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.47% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 94% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 71 positions, with the top ten at 28.6%. It sat 3.9% below its high of Aug 13, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, IWD or RDVY?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, IWD returned +27.4% and RDVY returned +22.0%, so IWD returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, IWD or RDVY?
- IWD charges 0.18% a year and RDVY charges 0.47%, so IWD is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do IWD and RDVY overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 90% of IWD and 94% of RDVY by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 14% 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.
Cite this page. ETFIQ, IWD against RDVY, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/IWD-RDVY Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources