SPY vs DGRO: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
SPY and DGRO are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. SPY is State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF, while DGRO is iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF. SPY is broader by holdings count, with 505 positions versus 395 for DGRO. SPY is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has SPY ahead on AIQ Score, 66 versus 63.
| Metric | SPY | DGRO |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.09% | 0.08% |
| Holdings | 505 | 395 |
| Top-10 concentration | 38.2% | 27.6% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 0.99% | 1.88% |
| Average volume | 46,698,705 | 1,422,259 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | +16.4% | +17.4% |
| YTD return | +12.8% | +14.2% |
| 5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested | +12.7% | +10.9% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 12.8% | 9.6% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -9.1% | -6.9% |
| Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested | -24.5% | -19.3% |
| Beta | 1.00 | 0.45 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.91 | 1.26 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.39 | 2.11 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 66/100 | 63/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 9/10 | 9/10 |
| Momentum | 63/100 | 80/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 88/100 | 78/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF vs iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF
SPY leads
SPY leads by 3 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Risk Resilience, but the lead has narrowed from 14 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 1 of 4 evidence groups support SPY, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF
iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SPY over DGRO, 66 versus 63 as of Oct 21, 2026. SPY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and risk resilience, while DGRO holds the stronger momentum profile. SPY also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 1 of 4 covered evidence groups favor SPY today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. SPY lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 3 points over 30 sessions.
Compare State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF and iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
SPY vs DGRO: which fits what
Each row is settled by a single measure. Where the gap is too small to matter it reads Similar, and no row decides the comparison as a whole.
| If you want | SPY | DGRO | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.09% | 0.08% | Similar |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 505 | 395 | SPY |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 38.2% | 27.6% | DGRO |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 0.99% | 1.88% | DGRO |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years | -24.5% | -19.3% | DGRO |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 12.8% | 9.6% | DGRO |
Similar means the gap is within 0.01 percentage points of expense ratio, 25% more holdings, 3 points of top-10 weight, 0.2 points of yield, 2 points of drawdown or 1 point of volatility. Past drawdowns and volatility describe the funds’ history, not their future.
Performance over time
Total return with distributions reinvested, from daily closes for both ETFs.
Total return comparison
Growth of $10,000, distributions reinvested
Split-adjusted closes; each distribution is reinvested at the close on its ex-dividend date. Taxes and trading costs are not modeled.
Compare SPY and DGRO against another ticker
Open a multi-ticker workspace without changing this focused pair page.
AIQ Factor Divergence
Where the two separate, on the four dimensions behind the AIQ Score. Bars read outward from a shared zero: further from the centre is a wider gap.
- Quality84 vs 63SPY +21
- Momentum63 vs 80DGRO +17
- Risk Resilience88 vs 78SPY +10
- Value41 vs 42Even
1 of 4 evidence groups favor SPY. SPY’s edge is concentrated in quality and risk resilience; DGRO keeps a meaningful momentum edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-20, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-19.
Largest factor move: Momentum +16
New signals
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
No factor moved materially.
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 9 active signals are unchanged.
The lead changed hands: SPY moved ahead of DGRO in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — SPY and DGRO both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
SPY (State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by quality and risk resilience.
DGRO (iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF): the counter-case, on momentum.
Fund facts, side by side
Two funds tracking overlapping universes are separated by cost and risk far more than by holdings. Those lead here.
| Measure | SPY | DGRO | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.09% | 0.08% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 505 | 395 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 46,698,705 | 1,422,259 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 12.8% | 9.6% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -9.1% | -6.9% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.91 | 1.26 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 1.00 | 0.45 | Sensitivity to the broad market. Neither direction is better — it depends on the role in your portfolio. |
Where the exposure actually sits
Sector exposure for each fund, ordered by the size of the difference.
How much of the same holdings they own
SPY and DGRO share 42.61% of their weighted exposure across 229 common holdings.
275 holdings are unique to SPY, and 161 holdings are unique to DGRO. Owning both is a partial overlap: a majority of the capital is distinct, but the largest positions are shared.
SPY is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 38.17% of the fund, against 27.58% for DGRO (505 holdings vs 395). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.
Largest shared positions
| Holding | SPY | DGRO | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSFTMICROSOFT CORP | 5.59% | 3.44% | 3.44% |
| AAPLAPPLE INC | 7.33% | 2.93% | 2.93% |
| AVGOBROADCOM INC | 2.61% | 2.4% | 2.4% |
| JPMJPMORGAN CHASE & CO | 1.45% | 3.2% | 1.45% |
| LLYELI LILLY + CO | 1.36% | 1.17% | 1.17% |
| XOMEXXONMOBIL HOLDINGS CORP | 1.05% | 3.04% | 1.05% |
| JNJJOHNSON & JOHNSON | 0.98% | 3.2% | 0.98% |
| VVISA CLASS A | 0.93% | 1.1% | 0.93% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What SPY adds that DGRO doesn’t
| Holding | SPY | DGRO |
|---|---|---|
| NVDANVIDIA CORP | 8.08% | Not held |
| AAPLAPPLE INC | 7.33% | 2.93% |
| AMZNAMAZON.COM INC | 3.77% | Not held |
| GOOGLALPHABET INC CL A | 2.98% | Not held |
| GOOGALPHABET INC CL C | 2.39% | Not held |
| METAMETA PLATFORMS INC CLASS A | 2.16% | Not held |
What DGRO adds that SPY doesn’t
| Holding | DGRO | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| JNJJOHNSON & JOHNSON | 3.2% | 0.98% |
| JPMJPMORGAN CHASE & CO | 3.2% | 1.45% |
| XOMEXXONMOBIL HOLDINGS CORP | 3.04% | 1.05% |
| ABBVABBVIE | 2.96% | 0.69% |
| MRKMERCK & CO INC | 2.17% | 0.55% |
| PGPROCTER & GAMBLE | 2.15% | 0.51% |
Each list is a fund’s largest positions by weight that the other fund does not hold, or holds at less than half the weight.
SPY vs DGRO: five-year payout growth
DGRO grew its split-adjusted payout faster over 2020-2025 — 7.09% a year against SPY's 5.05%. Neither fund reduced its annual distribution in any year of the window.
| Dividend metric | SPY | DGRO |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y payout CAGR | 5.05% | 7.09% |
| 2020 annual payout | $5.691 | $1.030 |
| 2025 annual payout | $7.281 | $1.451 |
| Calendar-year declines | 0 | 0 |
| Peer rank | #95 of 138 | #11 of 33 |
Split-adjusted annual distributions, 2020–2025. Research as of Sep 19, 2026. Yield and expense ratio above are current values, not part of this window.
AIQ Agreement Matrix
1 of 4 covered evidence groups favor SPY. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | Even | 66 vs 63 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | Even | Value 41 vs 42 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day 0.6% vs 1.6%; vs 200-day 5.9% vs 6% |
| Risk Resilience | SPY | Risk Resilience 88 vs 78 |
| Analyst expectations | Not covered | Not covered |
✓ agrees with the overall verdict · ✕ points the other way. Groups marked “not covered” lack data on one or both of SPY and DGRO and are excluded from the count.
AIQ Decision Stability
The conclusion is sensitive to small changes. Treat the lead as provisional and watch the flip conditions below.
- The AIQ gap is narrow at 3 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 1 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader is throwing conflicting signals. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
Stability combines the score gap, how broadly the evidence agrees, how steady the lead has been across daily snapshots, the current signal state on both names, and analyst dispersion on SPY.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20SPY lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 14 to 3 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SPY +3
- 66 vs 63
- 7 sessions ago
- SPY +3
- 66 vs 63
- 30 sessions ago
- SPY +14
- 66 vs 52
- 90 sessions ago
- SPY +10
- 70 vs 60
The lead changed hands 10 times in this window, most recently on Oct 20 when SPY moved ahead of DGRO.
AIQ Signal Divergence
Only the signals that bear on the head-to-head. A conflicted name is carrying bullish and bearish rules at the same time — the technical evidence is not pointing one way.
4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only SPY
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
6 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only DGRO
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 5 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, ATR Contraction - Coiling, EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish, 52-Week High Proximity, Uptrend Structure Active.
SPY leads the comparison while carrying a conflicted signal state, which is one reason the stability rating is not higher.
Price vs model alignment
Whether the latest session's price move confirms what the model did over the same session, or contradicts it.
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.53%, AIQ +4 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.14%, AIQ 0 points).
What would flip this result
A state, not a forecast. These are the specific, observable changes that would reverse the verdict — not a price prediction.
- 1DGRO closes the Quality gap — currently 21 points behind, the largest single contributor to SPY's edge.
- 2DGRO's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3SPY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 bullish and 1 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 11 points over 30 sessions, and a further 3-point move would eliminate SPY's advantage entirely.
The full evidence
Every number behind the verdict. The leader is called above each group so you are not left to solve it from the table.
Performance
DGRO leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | SPY | DGRO |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -1.2% | 2.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -0.6% | 3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 2.9% | 2.7% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 9.2% | 8.9% |
| Year to date | 12.8% | 14.2% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 16.4% | 17.4% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | SPY | DGRO |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 56.2 | 83.7 |
| ADX (14) | 12.5 | 30.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | 0.6% | 1.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 5.9% | 6% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 9% | 8.7% |
Risk
SPY is the more resilient| Metric | SPY | DGRO |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 1 | 0.45 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.91 | 1.26 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.39 | 2.11 |
| Max drawdown | -9.1% | -6.9% |
| Current drawdown | -1.3% | -1% |
| Annualized volatility | 12.8% | 9.6% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.4% | -1% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
How much do SPY and DGRO overlap?
SPY and DGRO share 42.61% of their weighted exposure across 229 common holdings. 275 holdings are unique to SPY, and 161 holdings are unique to DGRO. Owning both is a partial overlap: a majority of the capital is distinct, but the largest positions are shared.
Which ETF is more diversified, SPY or DGRO?
SPY holds more positions: 505 versus 395 for DGRO.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
The two are within a basis point: 0.09% for SPY and 0.08% for DGRO.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
DGRO, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 1.88% against 0.99% for SPY.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
SPY has been more volatile over the past year, at 12.8% annualized against 9.6% for DGRO.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
DGRO fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -19.3% against -24.5% for SPY.
Compare SPY and DGRO with others
Continue your research
This page answers which of the two. These answer the questions on either side of it.
How this comparison is scored
The Algovestiq AIQ Score composites four factors — Quality, Value, Momentum and Risk, each carrying a fixed weight. Sentiment is reported separately as SentimentPulse and is not folded into the composite. Scores refresh every trading day, and this page regenerates from the latest snapshot rather than being written once.
The verdict names a leader, states how broadly six independent evidence groups agree, and rates how durable that conclusion is given the score gap, its recent trajectory and the current signal state on both names.
How to use side-by-side comparison →This comparison is informational and educational, not investment advice. AIQ scores update daily; re-check after earnings, guidance or macro data that materially changes either name’s factor profile.