DIV vs DIVO: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
DIV and DIVO are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. DIV is Global X - SuperDividend U.S. ETF, while DIVO is Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF. DIVO is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has DIVO ahead on AIQ Score, 60 versus 54.
What is the main difference between DIV and DIVO?
DIV and DIVO have little in common: 1% of their weight is in the same securities.
| Metric | DIV | DIVO |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.45% | 0.56% |
| Holdings | 52 | 42 |
| Top-10 concentration | 26% | 49.8% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 6.65% | 6.28% |
| Average volume | 205,432 | 801,828 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | +11.4% | +9.4% |
| YTD return | +9.8% | +7.9% |
| 5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested | +5.3% | +10.9% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 10.3% | 9.7% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -6.6% | -6.7% |
| Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested | -21.1% | -13.7% |
| Beta | 0.12 | 0.52 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.65 | 0.49 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.07 | 0.78 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 54/100 | 60/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 5/10 | 8/10 |
| Momentum | 47/100 | 79/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 67/100 | 76/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
Global X - SuperDividend U.S. ETF vs Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF
DIVO leads
DIVO leads by 6 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Quality, having only recently taken the lead back from DIV.
Fragile: 3 of 4 evidence groups support DIVO, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
Global X - SuperDividend U.S. ETF
Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors DIVO over DIV, 60 versus 54 as of Oct 21, 2026. DIVO's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and quality, while DIV holds the stronger value profile. DIVO also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor DIVO today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. DIVO lead: Reversed — DIV led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; DIVO now leads by 6.
Compare Global X - SuperDividend U.S. ETF and Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
DIV vs DIVO: 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 | DIV | DIVO | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.45% | 0.56% | DIV |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 52 | 42 | Similar |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 26% | 49.8% | DIV |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 6.65% | 6.28% | DIV |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years | -21.1% | -13.7% | DIVO |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 10.3% | 9.7% | 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 DIV and DIVO 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.
- Momentum47 vs 79DIVO +32
- Value64 vs 40DIV +24
- Quality45 vs 57DIVO +12
- Risk Resilience67 vs 76DIVO +9
3 of 4 evidence groups favor DIVO. DIVO’s edge is concentrated in momentum and quality; DIV keeps a meaningful value 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 +10
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 3 active signals are unchanged.
No factor moved materially.
New signals
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
DIVO's lead narrowed by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — DIV and DIVO both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
DIVO (Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and quality.
DIV (Global X - SuperDividend U.S. ETF): the counter-case, on value, valuation.
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 | DIV | DIVO | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.45% | 0.56% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 52 | 42 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 205,432 | 801,828 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 10.3% | 9.7% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -6.6% | -6.7% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.65 | 0.49 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 0.12 | 0.52 | 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
DIV and DIVO share 1.09% of their weighted exposure across 1 common holdings.
49 holdings are unique to DIV, and 40 holdings are unique to DIVO. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
DIVO is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 49.81% of the fund, against 26.03% for DIV (42 holdings vs 52). 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 | DIV | DIVO | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| VZVERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC | 2.02% | 1.09% | 1.09% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What DIV adds that DIVO doesn’t
| Holding | DIV | DIVO |
|---|---|---|
| TENTSAKOS ENERGY NAVIGATION LTD | 3.65% | Not held |
| TIGOMILLICOM INTL CELLULAR S.A. | 2.87% | Not held |
| CBLCBL & ASSOCIATES PROPERTIES | 2.85% | Not held |
| SFLSFL CORP LTD | 2.57% | Not held |
| PAAPLAINS ALL AMER PIPELINE LP | 2.47% | Not held |
| UANCVR PARTNERS LP | 2.45% | Not held |
What DIVO adds that DIV doesn’t
| Holding | DIVO | DIV |
|---|---|---|
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 6.25% | Not held |
| AAPLApple Inc | 5.59% | Not held |
| CATCaterpillar Inc | 5.22% | Not held |
| VVisa Inc | 5.12% | Not held |
| JPMJPMORGAN CHASE & CO. | 4.94% | Not held |
| GSGoldman Sachs Group Inc/The | 4.94% | 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.
DIV vs DIVO: five-year payout growth
DIVO grew its split-adjusted payout faster over 2020-2025 — 12.25% a year against DIV's -1.37%. DIV: The 2020 payout was 25.6% below 2019, so the growth rate measures a recovery from a weak starting year. DIVO: The 2020 payout was 35.8% below 2019, so the growth rate measures a recovery from a weak starting year. DIVO: The payout jumped 50.7% in 2025, a single step rather than steady compounding - often an index or mandate change. DIVO: A single payment in an endpoint year was 6.4x the fund's median payment, so one distribution carries much of the result.
| Dividend metric | DIV | DIVO |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y payout CAGR | -1.37% | 12.25% |
| 2020 annual payout | $1.354 | $1.608 |
| 2025 annual payout | $1.264 | $2.866 |
| Calendar-year declines | 3 | 1 |
| Peer rank | #32 of 33 | #4 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
3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor DIVO. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | DIVO | 54 vs 60 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | DIV | Value 64 vs 40 |
| Technicals | DIVO | Price vs 50-day -2.2% vs 0.9%; vs 200-day -0.8% vs 3.5% |
| Risk Resilience | DIVO | Risk Resilience 67 vs 76 |
| 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 DIV and DIVO 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 6 points.
- The lead has already changed hands inside the comparison window. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The lead has been steady session to session. (supports the conclusion holding)
- 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 DIVO.
How the comparison changed
41 daily snapshots · Sep 8 – Oct 20DIVO lead: Reversed — DIV led by 1 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; DIVO now leads by 6.
- Today
- DIVO +6
- 54 vs 60
- 7 sessions ago
- DIVO +5
- 53 vs 58
- 30 sessions ago
- DIV +1
- 50 vs 49
- 90 sessions ago
- Not covered
The lead changed hands 2 times in this window, most recently on Sep 15 when DIV moved ahead of DIVO.
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.
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 1 neutral
No signal that the other name lacks.
6 bullish / 1 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only DIVO
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Keltner Channel Breakout — bullish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
- EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish — bullish, trend, medium horizon
- 52-Week High Proximity — bullish, risk, long horizon (1.8%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, ATR Contraction - Coiling, MACD Bullish Crossover.
DIVO 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 is down while the AIQ Score moved up 2 points over the same session — price and model disagree (price -0.21%, AIQ +2 points).
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.31%, 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.
- 1DIV closes the Momentum gap — currently 32 points behind, the largest single contributor to DIVO's edge.
- 2DIV's ATR Contraction - Coiling turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3DIVO's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 6 bullish and 1 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
DIVO leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | DIV | DIVO |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.1% | 1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | -1.6% | 1.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -3.7% | 2.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -0.4% | 4.8% |
| Year to date | 9.8% | 7.9% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 11.4% | 9.4% |
Technicals
DIVO has the stronger structure| Metric | DIV | DIVO |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 56.3 | 84.1 |
| ADX (14) | 31.8 | 22.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | -2.2% | 0.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -0.8% | 3.5% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 10.9% | 7.3% |
Risk
DIVO is the more resilient| Metric | DIV | DIVO |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.12 | 0.52 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.65 | 0.49 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.07 | 0.78 |
| Max drawdown | -6.6% | -6.7% |
| Current drawdown | -5.4% | -1.6% |
| Annualized volatility | 10.3% | 9.7% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1% | -1% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between DIV and DIVO?
DIV and DIVO have little in common: 1% of their weight is in the same securities.
How much do DIV and DIVO overlap?
DIV and DIVO share 1.09% of their weighted exposure across 1 common holdings. 49 holdings are unique to DIV, and 40 holdings are unique to DIVO. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Which ETF is more diversified, DIV or DIVO?
They hold a similar number of positions: 52 for DIV and 42 for DIVO.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
DIV has the lower expense ratio, 0.45% a year against 0.56% for DIVO.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
DIV, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 6.65% against 6.28% for DIVO.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
Their volatility over the past year is similar: 10.3% annualized for DIV and 9.7% for DIVO.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
DIVO fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -13.7% against -21.1% for DIV.
Compare DIV and DIVO 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.