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

RDVY vs SCHD: how they differ

RDVY and SCHD hold 4% of their weight in the same names, and SCHD returned more over the year.

First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF and Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, RDVY and SCHD hold 4% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions RDVY and SCHD both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingRDVYSCHD
AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING INC1.63%2.25%
CINCINNATI FINANCIAL CORP1.55%0.62%
REGIONS FINANCIAL CORP1.52%0.61%
ABBOTT LABORATORIES0.58%2.97%
SNAP-ON INC2.00%0.49%
EAST WEST BANCORP INC1.01%0.42%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in RDVYOnly in SCHD
APPLIED MATERIALS INC 4.69%QUALCOMM Inc 6.75%
LAM RESEARCH CORP 4.42%Texas Instruments Inc 5.92%
KLA CORP 4.14%UnitedHealth Group Inc 5.10%
GE VERNOVA INC 2.80%Coca-Cola Co/The 3.96%
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORP (THE) 2.15%Merck & Co Inc 3.87%
GE AEROSPACE 2.13%Chevron Corp 3.84%
ALPHABET INC 2.12%Verizon Communications Inc 3.66%
WILLIAMS SONOMA INC 2.12%Procter & Gamble Co/The 3.55%

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 and May 31, 2026.

RDVY and SCHD on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
RDVY
First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF
SCHD
Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerFirst TrustSchwab
What it isFirst Rising Dividend AchieversUS dividend
Total return, 1 year+22.0%+27.6%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+4.5 pts+10.1 pts
Expense ratio0.47%0.06%
Already in the S&P 50094.4%95.1%
Holdings7199

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.

SCHD in plain words

SCHD is an index equity fund tracking the US dividend. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +27.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.06% a year. By its holdings filed for May 31, 2026, 95% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 99 positions, with the top ten at 43.7%. It sat 3.1% below its high of Aug 24, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, RDVY or SCHD?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, RDVY returned +22.0% and SCHD returned +27.6%, so SCHD returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, RDVY or SCHD?
RDVY charges 0.47% a year and SCHD charges 0.06%, so SCHD is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do RDVY and SCHD overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 94% of RDVY and 95% of SCHD by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 4% 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.

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

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources