REGL vs SDIV: Performance, Holdings, Fees & Risk
REGL and SDIV are ETFs, but they can differ materially in exposure, yield, fees and risk. REGL is ProShares - S&P MidCap 400 Dividend Aristocrats ETF, while SDIV is Global X - SuperDividend ETF. SDIV is broader by holdings count, with 119 positions versus 66 for REGL. REGL has the lower expense ratio. Current AlgovestIQ evidence has SDIV ahead on AIQ Score, 59 versus 55.
What is the main difference between REGL and SDIV?
REGL and SDIV have little in common: 0% of their weight is in the same securities.
| Metric | REGL | SDIV |
|---|---|---|
| Fund | ||
| Expense ratio | 0.4% | 0.58% |
| Holdings | 66 | 119 |
| Top-10 concentration | 17.2% | 15% |
| Distribution yieldTrailing 12 months | 2.22% | 9.32% |
| Average volume | 57,471 | 420,613 |
| Performance | ||
| 1Y return | +7.9% | +3.2% |
| YTD return | +6.5% | -0.5% |
| 5Y annualized returnTotal return, distributions reinvested | +7.1% | +0.2% |
| Risk | ||
| Annualized volatility | 12.4% | 12.3% |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -9.8% | -11.6% |
| Max drawdown (5Y)Total return, distributions reinvested | -17% | -38.4% |
| Beta | 0.36 | 0.54 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.33 | -0.02 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.60 | -0.02 |
| AlgovestIQ | ||
| AIQ Score | 55/100 | 59/100 |
| AIQ Edge Score | 5/10 | 7/10 |
| Momentum | 60/100 | 52/100 |
| Risk Resilience | 72/100 | 72/100 |
AlgovestIQ AIQ Comparison
ProShares - S&P MidCap 400 Dividend Aristocrats ETF vs Global X - SuperDividend ETF
SDIV leads
SDIV leads by 4 AIQ points, primarily on Value and Quality, but the lead has narrowed from 7 points over 30 sessions.
Fragile: 2 of 4 evidence groups support SDIV, its lead is narrowing, and its current signal state is conflicted.
ProShares - S&P MidCap 400 Dividend Aristocrats ETF
Global X - SuperDividend ETF
The Algovestiq AIQ Score currently favors SDIV over REGL, 59 versus 55 as of Oct 21, 2026. SDIV's advantage is driven primarily by stronger value and quality, while REGL holds the stronger momentum profile. SDIV also shows the weaker technical structure relative to its 50-day moving average. 2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor SDIV today, and the comparison is rated Fragile on stability: the AIQ gap is narrow at 4 points. SDIV lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
Compare ProShares - S&P MidCap 400 Dividend Aristocrats ETF and Global X - SuperDividend ETF across performance, expense ratio, dividend yield, drawdown, volatility and the Algovestiq AIQ Score.
REGL vs SDIV: 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 | REGL | SDIV | Fits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lower costExpense ratio | 0.4% | 0.58% | REGL |
| Broader diversificationNumber of holdings | 66 | 119 | SDIV |
| Lower concentrationWeight of the 10 largest holdings | 17.2% | 15% | Similar |
| Higher incomeTrailing 12-month distribution yield | 2.22% | 9.32% | SDIV |
| Smaller drawdownsMax drawdown, 5 years | -17% | -38.4% | REGL |
| Lower volatilityAnnualized volatility, 1 year | 12.4% | 12.3% | 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 REGL and SDIV 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.
- Value54 vs 71SDIV +17
- Momentum60 vs 52REGL +8
- Quality42 vs 48SDIV +6
- Risk Resilience72 vs 72Even
2 of 4 evidence groups favor SDIV. SDIV’s edge is concentrated in value and quality; REGL 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 +11
New signals
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
Largest factor move: Momentum +12
No signal started or stopped since the prior session; its 4 active signals are unchanged.
SDIV's lead narrowed by 1 AIQ point in the latest session.
Deeper signal detail for each name lives on its own signals page — REGL and SDIV both carry a full feed there.
The central trade-off
SDIV (Global X - SuperDividend ETF): the stronger current systematic profile, led by value and quality.
REGL (ProShares - S&P MidCap 400 Dividend Aristocrats ETF): the counter-case, on momentum, 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 | REGL | SDIV | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense ratio | 0.4% | 0.58% | Lower is better — it compounds against you every year you hold. |
| Holdings | 66 | 119 | More holdings means broader diversification, not better returns. |
| Average volume | 57,471 | 420,613 | Liquidity — matters most if you trade size. |
| Annualized volatility | 12.4% | 12.3% | Lower is a steadier ride for the same exposure. |
| Max drawdown (1Y) | -9.8% | -11.6% | The worst peak-to-trough loss over the past year. |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.33 | -0.02 | Return per unit of risk. Higher is better. |
| Beta | 0.36 | 0.54 | 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
REGL and SDIV share 0% of their weighted exposure across 0 common holdings.
65 holdings are unique to REGL, and 97 holdings are unique to SDIV. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
REGL is the more concentrated of the two: its ten largest positions are 17.2% of the fund, against 15% for SDIV (66 holdings vs 119). Concentration cuts both ways — it is what drives outperformance when the top names work, and what makes the drawdown deeper when they do not.
What REGL adds that SDIV doesn’t
| Holding | REGL | SDIV |
|---|---|---|
| RGLDROYAL GOLD INC | 1.99% | Not held |
| UNMUNUM GROUP | 1.74% | Not held |
| AVNTAVIENT CORP | 1.73% | Not held |
| THGHANOVER INSURANCE GROUP INC/ | 1.72% | Not held |
| SEICSEI INVESTMENTS COMPANY | 1.69% | Not held |
| WTRGESSENTIAL UTILITIES INC | 1.69% | Not held |
What SDIV adds that REGL doesn’t
| Holding | SDIV | REGL |
|---|---|---|
| TFG-R.BKTHAIFOODS GROUP PCL-NVDR | 1.75% | Not held |
| NATNORDIC AMERICAN TANKERS LTD | 1.62% | Not held |
| HAUTO.OLHOEGH AUTOLINERS ASA | 1.59% | Not held |
| VCT.LVICTREX PLC | 1.58% | Not held |
| VAR.OLVAR ENERGI ASA | 1.57% | Not held |
| ITH.LITHACA ENERGY PLC | 1.46% | 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.
REGL vs SDIV: five-year payout growth
REGL grew its split-adjusted payout faster over 2020-2025 — 5.21% a year against SDIV's -5.55%. SDIV: The 2020 payout was 33.8% below 2019, so the growth rate measures a recovery from a weak starting year.
| Dividend metric | REGL | SDIV |
|---|---|---|
| 5Y payout CAGR | 5.21% | -5.55% |
| 2020 annual payout | $1.513 | $3.066 |
| 2025 annual payout | $1.950 | $2.305 |
| Calendar-year declines | 1 | 3 |
| Peer rank | #17 of 33 | #33 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
2 of 4 covered evidence groups favor SDIV. A wide gap backed by one group is a weaker case than a narrow gap backed by five.
| Evidence group | Favors | Reading |
|---|---|---|
| AIQ Score | SDIV | 55 vs 59 |
| Fundamentals | Not covered | Not covered |
| Valuation | SDIV | Value 54 vs 71 |
| Technicals | REGL | Price vs 50-day -1.2% vs -1.9%; vs 200-day -0.5% vs -4.4% |
| Risk Resilience | Even | Risk Resilience 72 vs 72 |
| 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 REGL and SDIV 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 4 points. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- Only 2 of 4 covered evidence groups agree. (argues the conclusion is provisional)
- The leader's advantage has been narrowing. (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 SDIV.
How the comparison changed
95 daily snapshots · Jun 22 – Oct 20SDIV lead: Weakening — the AIQ differential moved from 7 to 4 points over 30 sessions.
- Today
- SDIV +4
- 55 vs 59
- 7 sessions ago
- SDIV +6
- 51 vs 57
- 30 sessions ago
- SDIV +7
- 46 vs 53
- 90 sessions ago
- SDIV +4
- 55 vs 59
The lead changed hands 6 times in this window, most recently on Aug 17 when SDIV moved ahead of REGL.
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 / 2 bearish / 2 neutral, conflicted
Only REGL
- Bollinger Band Squeeze — neutral, volatility, short horizon
- Golden Cross Active — bullish, trend, long horizon (0.71%)
- BB Upper Band Breach — bearish, volatility, short horizon
- RSI Overbought — bearish, momentum, short horizon
1 bullish / 2 bearish / 1 neutral, conflicted
Only SDIV
- Death Cross Active — bearish, trend, long horizon (2.88%)
- Downtrend Structure Active — bearish, trend, long horizon
Both carry 2 more signals that do not separate them: ATR Contraction - Coiling, MACD Bullish Crossover.
SDIV 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.
Neither the price nor the AIQ Score moved enough in the latest session to confirm or contradict the other (price +0.02%, AIQ +3 points).
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).
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.
- 1REGL closes the Value gap — currently 17 points behind, the largest single contributor to SDIV's edge.
- 2REGL's BB Upper Band Breach resolves — a bearish volatility rule currently active against it.
- 3SDIV's conflicting signal state resolves bearish — it currently carries 1 bullish and 2 bearish rules at once.
- 4The narrowing continues — the lead has already given back 3 points over 30 sessions, and a further 4-point move would eliminate SDIV'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
REGL leads 6 of 6 windows| Metric | REGL | SDIV |
|---|---|---|
| 1 week (5 sessions) | 1.9% | 0.1% |
| 1 month (20 sessions) | 0.2% | -1.6% |
| 3 months (63 sessions) | -3.8% | -4.5% |
| 6 months (126 sessions) | -0.5% | -7.9% |
| Year to date | 6.5% | -0.5% |
| 1 year (252 sessions) | 7.9% | 3.2% |
Technicals
REGL has the stronger structure| Metric | REGL | SDIV |
|---|---|---|
| RSI (14) | 70.6 | 62.8 |
| ADX (14) | 34.8 | 27.3 |
| Price vs 50-day | -1.2% | -1.9% |
| Price vs 200-day | -0.5% | -4.4% |
| Volatility (1M, annualized) | 12.8% | 13.3% |
Risk
Split| Metric | REGL | SDIV |
|---|---|---|
| Beta | 0.36 | 0.54 |
| Sharpe ratio | 0.33 | -0.02 |
| Sortino ratio | 0.6 | -0.02 |
| Max drawdown | -9.8% | -11.6% |
| Current drawdown | -6.4% | -9.3% |
| Annualized volatility | 12.4% | 12.3% |
| Value at risk (95%) | -1.2% | -1.1% |
Straight answers
Short answers to the questions fund investors ask about this pair, from the figures above.
What is the difference between REGL and SDIV?
REGL and SDIV have little in common: 0% of their weight is in the same securities.
How much do REGL and SDIV overlap?
REGL and SDIV share 0% of their weighted exposure across 0 common holdings. 65 holdings are unique to REGL, and 97 holdings are unique to SDIV. Owning both is genuinely additive — most of the capital sits in different securities.
Which ETF is more diversified, REGL or SDIV?
SDIV holds more positions: 119 versus 66 for REGL.
Which has the lower expense ratio?
REGL has the lower expense ratio, 0.4% a year against 0.58% for SDIV.
Which ETF has the higher distribution yield?
SDIV, with a trailing 12-month distribution yield of 9.32% against 2.22% for REGL.
Which ETF has been more volatile?
Their volatility over the past year is similar: 12.4% annualized for REGL and 12.3% for SDIV.
Which ETF has had the smaller drawdown?
REGL fell less from peak to trough over the past five years: -17% against -38.4% for SDIV.
Compare REGL and SDIV 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.