Get the weekly note

Data as of Sep 13, 2026. Both funds on the fields they both publish, from the same sources.

ETFIQetfiq.com · independent ETF data

DGRO vs MOAT: how they differ

DGRO and MOAT hold 10% of their weight in the same names, and DGRO returned more over the year.

iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF and VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, DGRO and MOAT hold 10% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions DGRO and MOAT both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingDGROMOAT
MICROSOFT3.45%2.79%
BROADCOM INC2.38%2.23%
PEPSICO1.64%1.14%
MONDELEZ INTERNATIONAL INC CLASS A0.57%2.43%
APPLIED MATERIAL INC0.34%1.41%
AMPHENOL CORP CLASS A0.29%1.31%
NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORP0.27%1.12%
DANAHER0.24%2.44%
MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS INC0.20%1.34%
THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INC0.19%1.36%
ZOETIS INC CLASS A0.18%1.77%
NXP SEMICONDUCTORS NV0.16%1.24%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in DGROOnly in MOAT
JOHNSON & JOHNSON 3.20%Veeva Systems Inc 3.41%
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 3.20%Airbnb Inc 2.88%
EXXONMOBIL HOLDINGS CORP 3.07%Charles Schwab Corp/The 2.75%
APPLE 3.04%Lpl Financial Holdings Inc 2.73%
ABBVIE 3.02%Bristol-Myers Squibb Co 2.58%
PROCTER & GAMBLE 2.16%Nvidia Corp 2.58%
MERCK & CO INC 2.14%Estee Lauder Cos Inc/The 2.52%
PHILIP MORRIS INTERNATIONAL INC 2.13%Palo Alto Networks Inc 2.40%

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 Sep 10, 2026.

DGRO and MOAT on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
DGRO
iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF
MOAT
VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesVanEck
What it isCore Dividend GrowthMorningstar Wide Moat
Total return, 1 year+17.4%+11.3%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−0.1 pts−6.2 pts
Expense ratio0.08%0.46%
Already in the S&P 50094.7%91.6%
Holdings38755

DGRO in plain words

DGRO is an index equity fund tracking the Core Dividend Growth. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +17.4% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.08% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 95% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 387 positions, with the top ten at 27.8%.

MOAT in plain words

MOAT is an index equity fund tracking the Morningstar Wide Moat. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +11.3% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.46% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 92% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 55 positions, with the top ten at 27.1%. It sat 5.7% below its high of Aug 27, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, DGRO or MOAT?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DGRO returned +17.4% and MOAT returned +11.3%, so DGRO returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, DGRO or MOAT?
DGRO charges 0.08% a year and MOAT charges 0.46%, so DGRO is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do DGRO and MOAT overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 95% of DGRO and 92% of MOAT by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 10% 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.

DGRO against MOAT, ETFIQ, data as of Sep 13, 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, DGRO against MOAT, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/dgro-vs-moat Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources