Data as of Sep 12, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.
RDVY vs XLF: how they differ
RDVY and XLF hold 22% of their weight in the same names, and RDVY returned more over the year.
First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF and State Street(R) Financial Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF.
What they hold in common
By the books each fund has filed, RDVY and XLF hold 22% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.
| Holding | RDVY | XLF |
|---|---|---|
| BANK OF AMERICA CORP | 1.96% | 4.91% |
| JP MORGAN CHASE & COMPANY | 1.91% | 11.57% |
| VISA INC | 1.82% | 7.51% |
| AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY | 1.82% | 2.38% |
| BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORP (THE) | 2.15% | 1.31% |
| PNC FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP INC (THE) | 1.55% | 1.30% |
| US BANCORP | 1.56% | 1.24% |
| MASTERCARD INC | 1.19% | 5.47% |
| WELLS FARGO & COMPANY | 0.97% | 3.34% |
| CHARLES SCHWAB CORP (THE) | 0.95% | 1.99% |
| TRAVELERS COMPANIES INC (THE) | 2.00% | 0.93% |
| ALLSTATE CORP (THE) | 2.01% | 0.81% |
| Only in RDVY | Only in XLF |
|---|---|
| APPLIED MATERIALS INC 4.69% | Berkshire Hathaway Inc 12.10% |
| LAM RESEARCH CORP 4.42% | Goldman Sachs Group Inc/The 3.94% |
| KLA CORP 4.14% | Morgan Stanley 3.31% |
| GE VERNOVA INC 2.80% | Blackrock Inc 1.83% |
| GE AEROSPACE 2.13% | Capital One Financial Corp 1.65% |
| ALPHABET INC 2.12% | S&P Global Inc 1.63% |
| WILLIAMS SONOMA INC 2.12% | Chubb Ltd 1.62% |
| ROSS STORES INC 2.01% | Blackstone Inc 1.15% |
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 First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF | XLF State Street(R) Financial Select Sector SPDR(R) ETF | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it sits | Core index fund | Core index fund |
| Issuer | First Trust | State Street |
| What it is | First Rising Dividend Achievers | Financials |
| Total return, 1 year | +22.0% | +7.6% |
| S&P 500 over the same days | +17.5% | +17.5% |
| Gap to the S&P 500 | +4.5 pts | −9.9 pts |
| Expense ratio | 0.47% | 0.08% |
| Already in the S&P 500 | 94.4% | 100.0% |
| Holdings | 71 | 76 |
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.
XLF in plain words
XLF is an index equity fund tracking the Financials. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +7.6% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.08% a year. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026, 100% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 76 positions, with the top ten at 57.7%.
Questions people ask
- Which returned more over the last year, RDVY or XLF?
- In the year to Sep 12, 2026, with distributions reinvested, RDVY returned +22.0% and XLF returned +7.6%, so RDVY returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
- Which is cheaper, RDVY or XLF?
- RDVY charges 0.47% a year and XLF charges 0.08%, so XLF is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
- How much do RDVY and XLF overlap with the S&P 500?
- By their latest filed holdings, 94% of RDVY and 100% of XLF by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 22% 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, RDVY against XLF, data as of Sep 12, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/RDVY-XLF Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.
A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources