DUHP vs SPY: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
DUHP and SPY are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. DUHP is U.S. High Relative Profitability Portfolio ETF Class Shares, while SPY is State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF. SPY is broader by holdings count, with 505 positions versus 161 for DUHP. DUHP is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has SPY ahead on AIQ Score, 66 versus 59.
What is the main difference between DUHP and SPY?
SPY holds 505 positions to DUHP's 161, and 44% of their weight is in the same securities.
| Metric | DUHP | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.24% | 0.09% |
| Holdings | 161 | 505 |
| Top-10 concentration | 43% | 38.2% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 0.84% | 0.99% |
| Average volume | 812,057 | 46,698,705 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | +13.4% | +16.4% |
| YTD return | +11.9% | +12.8% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 11.8% | 12.8% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -9.2% | -9.1% |
| Beta | 0.87 | 1.00 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.76 | 0.91 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.17 | 1.39 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 59/100 | 66/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 7/10 | 9/10 |
| Momentum | 73/100 | 63/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 85/100 | 88/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
U.S. High Relative Profitability Portfolio ETF Class Shares vs State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF
SPY leads
SPY leads by 7 AIQ points, primarily on Quality and Value.
Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support SPY, and its current signal state is conflicted.
U.S. High Relative Profitability Portfolio ETF Class Shares
State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SPY over DUHP, 66 versus 59 as of Oct 21, 2026. SPY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger quality and value, while DUHP holds the stronger momentum profile. SPY also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor SPY today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. SPY lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 7 points over 30 sessions.
Compare U.S. High Relative Profitability Portfolio ETF Class Shares and State Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
DUHP vs SPY: 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 | DUHP | SPY | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.24% | 0.09% | SPY |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 161 | 505 | SPY |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 43% | 38.2% | SPY |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 0.84% | 0.99% | Similar |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 1 year | -9.2% | -9.1% | Similar |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 11.8% | 12.8% | 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 DUHP and SPY 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.
- Quality58 vs 84SPY +26
- Momentum73 vs 63DUHP +10
- Value35 vs 41SPY +6
- Risk Resilience85 vs 88Even
2 of 4 evidence groups favor SPY. SPY’s edge is concentrated in quality and value; DUHP 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 +8
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 6 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum +16
New signals
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
SPY's lead widened by 2 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — DUHP and SPY 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 value.
DUHP (U.S. High Relative Profitability Portfolio ETF Class Shares): 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 | DUHP | SPY | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.24% | 0.09% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 161 | 505 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 812,057 | 46,698,705 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 11.8% | 12.8% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -9.2% | -9.1% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.76 | 0.91 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 0.87 | 1.00 | 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
DUHP and SPY share 43.64% of their weighted exposure across 138 common holdings.
22 holdings are unique to DUHP, and 366 holdings are unique to SPY. Owning both is a partial overlap: a majority of the capital is distinct, but the largest positions are shared.
DUHP is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 43% of the fund, against 38.17% for SPY (161 holdings vs 505). 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 | DUHP | SPY | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANVIDIA CORP | 7.79% | 8.08% | 7.79% |
| AAPLAPPLE INC | 7.3% | 7.33% | 7.3% |
| MSFTMICROSOFT CORP | 5.01% | 5.59% | 5.01% |
| METAMETA PLATFORMS INC | 3.69% | 2.16% | 2.16% |
| MUMICRON TECHNOLOGY INC. | 3.78% | 1.69% | 1.69% |
| LLYELI LILLY AND COMPANY | 4.4% | 1.36% | 1.36% |
| VVISA INC | 4.22% | 0.93% | 0.93% |
| MAMASTERCARD INC - A | 2.37% | 0.7% | 0.7% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What DUHP adds that SPY doesn’t
| Holding | DUHP | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| LLYELI LILLY AND COMPANY | 4.4% | 1.36% |
| VVISA INC | 4.22% | 0.93% |
| MUMICRON TECHNOLOGY INC. | 3.78% | 1.69% |
| MAMASTERCARD INC - A | 2.37% | 0.7% |
| CATCATERPILLAR INC. | 2.3% | 0.57% |
| LRCXLAM RESEARCH CORP | 2.15% | 0.57% |
What SPY adds that DUHP doesn’t
| Holding | SPY | DUHP |
|---|---|---|
| AMZNAMAZON.COM INC | 3.77% | Not held |
| GOOGLALPHABET INC CL A | 2.98% | Not held |
| AVGOBROADCOM INC | 2.61% | Not held |
| GOOGALPHABET INC CL C | 2.39% | Not held |
| TSLATESLA INC | 1.56% | Not held |
| JPMJPMORGAN CHASE + CO | 1.45% | 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.
DUHP vs SPY: five-year payout growth
SPY grew its split-adjusted payout at 5.05% a year over 2020-2025. DUHP began paying distributions in 2022, so it has no 2020-2025 growth rate to compare.
| Dividend metric | DUHP | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 annual payout | $0.388 | $7.281 |
| Peer rank | not ranked | #95 of 138 |
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 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 | SPY | 59 vs 66 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | SPY | Value 35 vs 41 |
| Technicals | Even | Price vs 50-day 1.2% vs 0.6%; vs 200-day 5.7% vs 5.9% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 85 vs 88 |
| 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 DUHP and SPY 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 7 points.
- Only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (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 SPY.
How the comparison changed
120 daily snapshots · Jun 21 – Oct 20SPY lead: Stable — the AIQ differential has held near 7 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SPY +7
- 59 vs 66
- 7 sessions ago
- SPY +9
- 57 vs 66
- 30 sessions ago
- SPY +9
- 57 vs 66
- 90 sessions ago
- SPY +11
- 59 vs 70
The lead changed hands 3 times in this window, most recently on Jul 29 when SPY 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.
DUHP and SPY carry the same 6 signals, so the signals do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, ATR Contraction - Coiling, EMA Ribbon Expansion Bullish, 52-Week High Proximity, Uptrend Structure Active, MACD Bearish Crossover.
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 +0.49%, AIQ +2 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved up over the latest session (price +0.53%, AIQ +4 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 Quality gap — currently 26 points behind, the largest single contributor to SPY's edge.
- 2DUHP generates a confirmed bullish trend signal it does not currently carry, such as MACD Bullish Crossover.
- 3SPY's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 4 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
SPY leads 4 of 6 windows| Metric | DUHP | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | -0.2% | -1.2% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 0.3% | -0.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | 2.8% | 2.9% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 9.2% | 9.2% |
| Year to date | 11.9% | 12.8% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 13.4% | 16.4% |
Technicals
Split| Metric | DUHP | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 63.2 | 56.2 |
| ADX (14) | 8.1 | 12.5 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.2% | 0.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 5.7% | 5.9% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 8.1% | 9% |
Risk
Split| Metric | DUHP | SPY |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.87 | 1 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.76 | 0.91 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.17 | 1.39 |
| Max drawdown | -9.2% | -9.1% |
| Current drawdown | -0.8% | -1.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 11.8% | 12.8% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.3% | -1.4% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between DUHP and SPY?
SPY holds 505 positions to DUHP's 161, and 44% of their weight is in the same securities.
How much do DUHP and SPY overlap?
DUHP and SPY share 43.64% of their weighted exposure across 138 common holdings. 22 holdings are unique to DUHP, and 366 holdings are unique to SPY. Owning both is a partial overlap: a majority of the capital is distinct, but the largest positions are shared.
Which ETF is more diversified, DUHP or SPY?
SPY holds more positions: 505 versus 161 for DUHP.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
SPY has the lower expense ratio, 0.09% a year against 0.24% for DUHP.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
Their trailing 12-month distribution yields are similar: 0.84% for DUHP and 0.99% for SPY.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
Their volatility over the past year is similar: 11.8% annualized for DUHP and 12.8% for SPY.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
Their worst peak-to-trough falls over the past year are similar: -9.2% for DUHP and -9.1% for SPY.
Compare DUHP and SPY 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.