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 QUAL: how they differ

DGRO and QUAL hold 31% of their weight in the same names, and DGRO returned more over the year.

iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF and iShares MSCI USA Quality Factor ETF.

What they hold in common

By the books each fund has filed, DGRO and QUAL hold 31% of their money in the same securities at the same weight.

Positions DGRO and QUAL both hold, largest shared weight first
HoldingDGROQUAL
MICROSOFT3.45%7.67%
APPLE3.04%7.10%
EXXONMOBIL HOLDINGS CORP3.07%2.35%
JOHNSON & JOHNSON3.20%2.17%
MERCK & CO INC2.14%1.40%
ELI LILLY1.17%3.62%
VISA CLASS A1.11%3.21%
WALMART INC0.83%0.95%
COCA-COLA1.98%0.82%
PROCTER & GAMBLE2.16%0.82%
ACCENTURE PLC CLASS A0.88%0.74%
MASTERCARD CLASS A0.71%2.28%
Largest positions each one holds and the other does not
Only in DGROOnly in QUAL
JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 3.20%NVIDIA 6.44%
ABBVIE 3.02%META PLATFORMS CLASS A 4.32%
BROADCOM INC 2.38%ALPHABET CLASS A 1.94%
PHILIP MORRIS INTERNATIONAL INC 2.13%BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY INC CLASS B 1.85%
HOME DEPOT 1.98%NETFLIX 1.84%
BANK OF AMERICA 1.86%ALPHABET CLASS C 1.53%
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC 1.66%ARISTA NETWORKS 1.46%
WELLS FARGO 1.32%FORTINET 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 Sep 10, 2026.

DGRO and QUAL on the fields both publish, as of Sep 13, 2026. Source: ETFIQ.
DGRO
iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF
QUAL
iShares MSCI USA Quality Factor ETF
Where it sitsCore index fundCore index fund
IssueriSharesiShares
What it isCore Dividend GrowthMSCI USA Quality Factor
Total return, 1 year+17.4%+16.0%
S&P 500 over the same days+17.5%+17.5%
Gap to the S&P 500−0.1 pts−1.5 pts
Expense ratio0.08%0.15%
Already in the S&P 50094.7%98.9%
Holdings387121

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%.

QUAL in plain words

QUAL is an index equity fund tracking the MSCI USA Quality Factor. Over the year to Sep 11, 2026 it returned +16.0% with distributions reinvested, against +17.5% for the S&P 500 and +23.0% for the Nasdaq-100. The prospectus expense ratio is 0.15% a year. By its holdings filed for Sep 10, 2026, 99% of the fund by weight is stocks the S&P 500 also holds, across 121 positions, with the top ten at 44.4%. It sat 3.1% below its high of Aug 13, 2026 on Sep 11, 2026.

Questions people ask

Which returned more over the last year, DGRO or QUAL?
In the year to Sep 13, 2026, with distributions reinvested, DGRO returned +17.4% and QUAL returned +16.0%, so DGRO returned more. One year is one year; the longer windows are in the table.
Which is cheaper, DGRO or QUAL?
DGRO charges 0.08% a year and QUAL charges 0.15%, so DGRO is cheaper. Fees come from each fund's prospectus.
How much do DGRO and QUAL overlap with the S&P 500?
By their latest filed holdings, 95% of DGRO and 99% of QUAL by weight is stocks the S&P 500 already holds. Between the two funds, 31% 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 QUAL, 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 QUAL, data as of Sep 13, 2026. https://etfiq.com/compare/any/dgro-vs-qual Free to use with attribution; the underlying files are at Open data.

A comparison is not a recommendation. Standards and sources