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 VB: how they differ

RDVY and VB hold 1% of their weight in the same names, and RDVY returned more over the year.

First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF and Vanguard Small-Cap Index Fund.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, RDVY and VB hold 1% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions RDVY and VB both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingRDVYVB
WILLIAMS SONOMA INC2.12%0.33%
EAST WEST BANCORP INC1.01%0.21%
RALPH LAUREN CORP1.01%0.17%
MUELLER INDUSTRIES INC1.93%0.17%
UNUM GROUP0.51%0.17%
COCA-COLA CONSOLIDATED INC1.16%0.13%
ALLISON TRANSMISSION HOLDINGS INC0.40%0.11%
AECOM0.22%0.11%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in RDVYOnly in VB
APPLIED MATERIALS INC 4.69%Credo Technology Group Holding Ltd 0.55%
LAM RESEARCH CORP 4.42%Jabil Inc 0.49%
KLA CORP 4.14%REVOLUTION Medicines Inc 0.46%
GE VERNOVA INC 2.80%Astera Labs Inc 0.45%
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORP (THE) 2.15%Natera Inc 0.45%
GE AEROSPACE 2.13%EMCOR Group Inc 0.45%
ALPHABET INC 2.12%Twilio Inc 0.38%
ROSS STORES INC 2.01%NRG Energy Inc 0.38%

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.

RDVY and VB on the fields both publish, as of Sep 12, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
RDVY
First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF
VB
Vanguard Small-Cap Index Fund
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssuerFirst TrustVanguard
What it isFirst Rising Dividend AchieversSmall-Cap
Total return, 1 year+22.0%+15.2%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500+4.5 pts−2.3 pts
Expense ratio0.47%0.03%
Already in the S&P 50094.4%21.7%
Holdings711311

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.

VB in plain words

VB is an index equity fund tracking the Small-Cap. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +15.2% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.03% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 22% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 1311 positions, with the top ten at 4.3%. It sat 5.1% below its high of Aug 14, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, RDVY or VB?
In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, RDVY returned +22.0% and VB returned +15.2%, so RDVY returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, RDVY or VB?
RDVY charges 0.47% a year and VB charges 0.03%, so VB is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do RDVY and VB overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 94% of RDVY and 22% of VB by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 1% 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 VB, 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 VB, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/RDVY-VB Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources