DVY vs FDVV: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
DVY and FDVV are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. DVY is iShares Select Dividend ETF, while FDVV is Fidelity High Dividend ETF. FDVV is more concentrated at the top, based on top-10 holdings weight. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has DVY ahead on AIQ Score, 65 versus 60.
What is the main difference between DVY and FDVV?
DVY and FDVV have little in common: 20% of their weight is in the same securities.
| Metric | DVY | FDVV |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.38% | 0.15% |
| Holdings | 102 | 108 |
| Top-10 concentration | 19.5% | 35.4% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 3.31% | 2.77% |
| Average volume | 371,310 | 727,945 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | +14.1% | +10.8% |
| YTD return | +14.3% | +9.3% |
| 5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested | +10% | +13.3% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 11.6% | 10.9% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -8.1% | -10% |
| Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested | -17.5% | -20.2% |
| Beta | 0.23 | 0.66 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.87 | 0.66 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.56 | 1.02 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 65/100 | 60/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 9/10 | 8/10 |
| Momentum | 82/100 | 58/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 69/100 | 81/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
iShares Select Dividend ETF vs Fidelity High Dividend ETF
DVY leads
DVY leads by 5 AIQ points, primarily on Momentum and Value, having only recently taken the lead back from FDVV.
Fragile: 3 of 4 evidence groups support DVY, the lead recently changed hands, and its current signal state is conflicted.
iShares Select Dividend ETF
Fidelity High Dividend ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors DVY over FDVV, 65 versus 60 as of Oct 24, 2026. DVY's advantage is driven primarily by stronger momentum and value, while FDVV holds the stronger risk resilience profile. DVY also shows the stronger technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 3 of 4 covered evidence groups favor DVY today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 5 points. DVY lead: Reversed — FDVV led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; DVY now leads by 5.
Compare iShares Select Dividend ETF and Fidelity High Dividend ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
DVY vs FDVV: 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 | DVY | FDVV | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.38% | 0.15% | FDVV |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 102 | 108 | Similar |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 19.5% | 35.4% | DVY |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 3.31% | 2.77% | DVY |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years | -17.5% | -20.2% | DVY |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 11.6% | 10.9% | 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 DVY and FDVV 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.
- Momentum82 vs 58DVY +24
- Risk Resilience69 vs 81FDVV +12
- Value58 vs 54DVY +4
- Quality56 vs 57Even
3 of 4 evidence groups favor DVY. DVY’s edge is concentrated in momentum and value; FDVV keeps a meaningful risk resilience edge.
What changed since the last close
Latest scored session 2026-10-23, compared against the prior scored session 2026-10-22.
Largest factor move: Value -1
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 8 active signals are unchanged.
Largest factor move: Momentum -21
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
DVY's lead widened by 4 AIQ points in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — DVY and FDVV both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
DVY (iShares Select Dividend ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by momentum and value.
FDVV (Fidelity High Dividend ETF): the counter-case, on risk resilience.
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 | DVY | FDVV | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.38% | 0.15% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 102 | 108 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 371,310 | 727,945 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 11.6% | 10.9% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -8.1% | -10% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.87 | 0.66 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 0.23 | 0.66 | 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
DVY and FDVV share 19.81% of their weighted exposure across 25 common holdings.
73 holdings are unique to DVY, and 69 holdings are unique to FDVV. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
FDVV is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 35.43% of the fund, against 19.46% for DVY (108 holdings vs 102). 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 | DVY | FDVV | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| MOALTRIA GROUP INC | 2.09% | 1.53% | 1.53% |
| PRUPRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL INC | 2.15% | 1.46% | 1.46% |
| BBYBEST BUY CO INC | 1.4% | 1.68% | 1.4% |
| FFORD MOTOR CO | 1.5% | 1.38% | 1.38% |
| USBUS BANCORP DEL | 1.36% | 1.41% | 1.36% |
| HPQHP INC | 2.44% | 1.29% | 1.29% |
| TFCTRUIST FINANCIAL | 1.36% | 1.2% | 1.2% |
| PMPHILIP MORRIS INTL INC | 1.11% | 1.8% | 1.11% |
Shared weight is the lower of the two positions — the portion of capital both funds genuinely have in the same security.
What DVY adds that FDVV doesn’t
| Holding | DVY | FDVV |
|---|---|---|
| PFEPFIZER | 2.25% | 0.29% |
| TROWT ROWE PRICE GROUP | 2.06% | Not held |
| VZVERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC | 1.86% | 0.14% |
| OKEONEOK | 1.85% | Not held |
| TGTTARGET CORP | 1.71% | Not held |
| GISGENERAL MILLS INC | 1.55% | Not held |
What FDVV adds that DVY doesn’t
| Holding | FDVV | DVY |
|---|---|---|
| NVDANVIDIA CORP | 7.15% | Not held |
| AAPLAPPLE INC | 6.54% | Not held |
| MSFTMICROSOFT CORP | 5.18% | Not held |
| DELLDELL TECHNOLOGIES INC CL C | 3.33% | Not held |
| AVGOBROADCOM INC | 2.88% | Not held |
| JPMJPMORGAN CHASE & CO | 2.77% | 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.
DVY vs FDVV: five-year payout growth
FDVV grew its split-adjusted payout faster over 2020-2025 — 9.80% a year against DVY's 7.87%. DVY never reduced its annual distribution in the window; FDVV did in 1 year. FDVV: The 2020 payout was 19.7% below 2019, so the growth rate measures a recovery from a weak starting year.
| Dividend metric | DVY | FDVV |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y payout CAGR | 7.87% | 9.80% |
| 2020 annual payout | $3.523 | $1.025 |
| 2025 annual payout | $5.145 | $1.636 |
| Calendar-year declines | 0 | 1 |
| Peer rank | #9 of 33 | #6 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 DVY. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | DVY | 65 vs 60 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | DVY | Value 58 vs 54 |
| Technicals | DVY | Price vs 50-day 1.1% vs -0.6%; vs 200-day 3.5% vs 3.1% |
| Risk Resilience | FDVV | Risk Resilience 69 vs 81 |
| 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 DVY and FDVV 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 5 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- 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 DVY.
How the comparison changed
48 daily snapshots · Sep 6 – Oct 23DVY lead: Reversed — FDVV led by 2 AIQ points 30 sessions ago; DVY now leads by 5.
- Today
- DVY +5
- 65 vs 60
- 7 sessions ago
- DVY +3
- 61 vs 58
- 30 sessions ago
- FDVV +2
- 52 vs 54
- 90 sessions ago
- Not covered
The lead has not changed hands in this window.
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.
6 bullish / 1 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only DVY
- 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 (3.0%)
- Uptrend Structure Active — bullish, trend, long horizon
2 bullish / 0 bearish / 2 neutral
Only FDVV
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
Both carry 3 more signals that do not separate them: Golden Cross Active, ATR Contraction - Coiling, MACD Bullish Crossover.
DVY 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 down over the latest session (price -0.91%, AIQ -1 points).
Price and the AIQ Score both moved down over the latest session (price -0.74%, AIQ -5 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.
- 1FDVV closes the Momentum gap — currently 24 points behind, the largest single contributor to DVY's edge.
- 2FDVV's Bollinger Band Squeeze turns directional — it is neutral today and would confirm a change in trend.
- 3DVY'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
DVY leads 5 of 6 windows| Metric | DVY | FDVV |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.3% | 0.5% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 4.2% | 0.4% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -1.2% | -1.1% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | 6.2% | 5.6% |
| Year to date | 14.3% | 9.3% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 14.1% | 10.8% |
Technicals
DVY has the stronger structure| Metric | DVY | FDVV |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 72 | 61.3 |
| ADX (14) | 26.4 | 15.9 |
| Price vs 50-day | 1.1% | -0.6% |
| Price vs 200-day | 3.5% | 3.1% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 13.7% | 8.5% |
Risk
FDVV is the more resilient| Metric | DVY | FDVV |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.23 | 0.66 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.87 | 0.66 |
| Sortino ratio | 1.56 | 1.02 |
| Max drawdown | -8.1% | -10% |
| Current drawdown | -2.6% | -3.7% |
| Annualized volatility | 11.6% | 10.9% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1% | -1.1% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between DVY and FDVV?
DVY and FDVV have little in common: 20% of their weight is in the same securities.
How much do DVY and FDVV overlap?
DVY and FDVV share 19.81% of their weighted exposure across 25 common holdings. 73 holdings are unique to DVY, and 69 holdings are unique to FDVV. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Which ETF is more diversified, DVY or FDVV?
They hold a similar number of positions: 102 for DVY and 108 for FDVV.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
FDVV has the lower expense ratio, 0.15% a year against 0.38% for DVY.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
DVY, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 3.31% against 2.77% for FDVV.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
Their volatility over the past year is similar: 11.6% annualized for DVY and 10.9% for FDVV.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
DVY fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -17.5% against -20.2% for FDVV.
Compare DVY and FDVV 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.