DIA vs DUHP: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
DIA and DUHP are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. DIA is State Street SPDR Dow Jones Industrial Average ETF Trust, while DUHP is U.S. High Relative Profitability Portfolio ETF Class Shares. DUHP is broader by holdings count, with 161 positions versus 31 for DIA. DIA is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has DIA ahead on AIQ Score, 68 versus 59.
What is the main difference between DIA and DUHP?
DUHP holds 161 positions to DIA's 31, and 28% of their weight is in the same securities.
| Metric | DIA | DUHP |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.16% | 0.24% |
| Holdings | 31 | 161 |
| Top-10 concentration | 55.1% | 43% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 1.37% | 0.84% |
| Average volume | 3,785,458 | 812,057 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | +14.1% | +13.4% |
| YTD return | +9.1% | +11.9% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 12.7% | 11.8% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -10.1% | -9.2% |
| Beta | 0.83 | 0.87 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.76 | 0.76 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.25 | 1.17 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 68/100 | 59/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 10/10 | 7/10 |
| Momentum | 84/100 | 73/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 82/100 | 85/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
State Street SPDR Dow Jones Industrial Average ETF Trust vs U.S. High Relative Profitability Portfolio ETF Class Shares
DIA leads
DIA leads by 9 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Momentum, having only recently taken the lead back from DUHP.
Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support DIA, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
State Street SPDR Dow Jones Industrial Average ETF Trust
U.S. High Relative Profitability Portfolio ETF Class Shares
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors DIA over DUHP, 68 versus 59 as of Oct 21, 2026. DIA's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and momentum. DIA also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor DIA today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. DIA lead: Reversed — DUHP led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; DIA now leads by 9.
Compare State Street SPDR Dow Jones Industrial Average ETF Trust and U.S. High Relative Profitability Portfolio ETF Class Shares across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
DIA vs DUHP: 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 | DIA | DUHP | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.16% | 0.24% | DIA |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 31 | 161 | DUHP |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 55.1% | 43% | DUHP |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 1.37% | 0.84% | DIA |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 1 year | -10.1% | -9.2% | Similar |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 12.7% | 11.8% | Similar |
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 DIA and DUHP 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.
- Value47 vs 35DIA +12
- Momentum84 vs 73DIA +11
- Quality67 vs 58DIA +9
- Risk Resilience82 vs 85Even
2 of 4 evidence groups favor DIA. DIA’s edge is concentrated in value and momentum.
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 +23
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +8
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
DIA's lead widened by 4 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — DIA and DUHP both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
DIA (State Street SPDR Dow Jones Industrial Average ETF Trust): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and momentum.
DUHP (U.S. High Relative Profitability Portfolio ETF Class Shares): the counter-case, on technicals.
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 | DIA | DUHP | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.16% | 0.24% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 31 | 161 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 3,785,458 | 812,057 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 12.7% | 11.8% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -10.1% | -9.2% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.76 | 0.76 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 0.83 | 0.87 | 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
DIA and DUHP share 27.78% of their weighted exposure across 16 common holdings.
14 holdings are unique to DIA, and 144 holdings are unique to DUHP. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
DIA is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 55.07% of the fund, against 43% for DUHP (31 holdings vs 161). 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 | DIA | DUHP | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSFTMICROSOFT CORP | 5.61% | 5.01% | 5.01% |
| VVISA INC | 4.18% | 4.22% | 4.18% |
| AAPLAPPLE INC. | 3.72% | 7.3% | 3.72% |
| NVDANVIDIA CORP | 2.49% | 7.79% | 2.49% |
| CATCATERPILLAR INC | 9.17% | 2.3% | 2.3% |
| HDHOME DEPOT INC | 3.48% | 1.86% | 1.86% |
| MRKMERCK + CO. INC. | 1.65% | 1.6% | 1.6% |
| AMGNAMGEN INC | 4.36% | 1.4% | 1.4% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What DIA adds that DUHP doesn’t
| Holding | DIA | DUHP |
|---|---|---|
| GSGOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC | 11.61% | Not held |
| CATCATERPILLAR INC | 9.17% | 2.3% |
| UNHUNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC | 4.42% | Not held |
| AMGNAMGEN INC | 4.36% | 1.4% |
| TRVTRAVELERS COS INC/THE | 4.19% | 0.92% |
| JPMJPMORGAN CHASE + CO | 4.03% | Not held |
What DUHP adds that DIA doesn’t
| Holding | DUHP | DIA |
|---|---|---|
| NVDANVIDIA CORP | 7.79% | 2.49% |
| LLYELI LILLY AND COMPANY | 4.4% | Not held |
| MUMICRON TECHNOLOGY INC. | 3.78% | Not held |
| METAMETA PLATFORMS INC | 3.69% | Not held |
| MAMASTERCARD INC - A | 2.37% | Not held |
| LRCXLAM RESEARCH CORP | 2.15% | Not held |
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.
DIA vs DUHP: five-year payout growth
DIA grew its split-adjusted payout at 3.73% a year over 2020-2025. DUHP began paying distributions in 2022, so it has no 2020-2025 growth rate to compare.
| Dividend metric | DIA | DUHP |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 annual payout | $6.879 | $0.388 |
| Peer rank | #111 of 138 | not ranked |
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
2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor DIA. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | DIA | 68 vs 59 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | DIA | Value 47 vs 35 |
| Technicals | DUHP | Price vs 50-day 0.8% vs 1.2%; vs 200-day 3.9% vs 5.7% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 82 vs 85 |
| 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 DIA and DUHP 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 moderate at 9 points.
- Only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (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 DIA.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20DIA lead: Reversed — DUHP led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; DIA now leads by 9.
- Today
- DIA +9
- 68 vs 59
- 7 sessions ago
- DIA +4
- 61 vs 57
- 30 sessions ago
- DUHP +2
- 55 vs 57
- 90 sessions ago
- DIA +2
- 61 vs 59
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Oct 9 when DIA moved ahead of DUHP.
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.
3 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only DIA
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- MACD Bullish Crossover — bullish, momentum, short horizon
4 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only DUHP
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (0.3%)
- MACD Bearish Crossover — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, ATR Contraction - Coiling, Uptrend Structure Active.
DIA 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 +0.64%, AIQ +6 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.49%, AIQ +2 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.
- 1DUHP closes the Value gap — currently 12 points behind, the largest single contributor to DIA's edge.
- 2DUHP generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3DIA's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 3 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4A regime shift changes factor weighting — Quality and Value carry the heaviest weights in the composite, so a rotation toward either would move the result most.
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
Split across windows| Metric | DIA | DUHP |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.6% | -0.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 1.2% | 0.3% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 0.6% | 2.8% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 6.7% | 9.2% |
| Year to date | 9.1% | 11.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 14.1% | 13.4% |
Technicals
DUHP has the stronger structure| Metric | DIA | DUHP |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 74.7 | 63.2 |
| ADX (14) | 19.1 | 8.1 |
| Price vs 50-day | 0.8% | 1.2% |
| Price vs 200-day | 3.9% | 5.7% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 9.7% | 8.1% |
Risk
Split| Metric | DIA | DUHP |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.83 | 0.87 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.76 | 0.76 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.25 | 1.17 |
| Max drawdown | -10.1% | -9.2% |
| Current drawdown | -3.4% | -0.8% |
| Annualized volatility | 12.7% | 11.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.2% | -1.3% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between DIA and DUHP?
DUHP holds 161 positions to DIA's 31, and 28% of their weight is in the same securities.
How much do DIA and DUHP overlap?
DIA and DUHP share 27.78% of their weighted exposure across 16 common holdings. 14 holdings are unique to DIA, and 144 holdings are unique to DUHP. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Which ETF is more diversified, DIA or DUHP?
DUHP holds more positions: 161 versus 31 for DIA.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
DIA has the lower expense ratio, 0.16% a year against 0.24% for DUHP.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
DIA, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 1.37% against 0.84% for DUHP.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
Their volatility over the past year is similar: 12.7% annualized for DIA and 11.8% for DUHP.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
Their worst peak-to-trough falls over the past year are similar: -10.1% for DIA and -9.2% for DUHP.
Compare DIA and DUHP 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.