DGRO vs SPY: Complete Comparison
iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF vs SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust โ overlap, correlation, performance & risk analysis
Visual Overlap
Price Performance
Historical price comparison over 3M
๐Performance Comparison
โ ๏ธRisk Metrics
Interpretation:
- ๐ Lower volatility = smoother ride
- โก Higher Sharpe/Sortino = better risk-adjusted returns
- โ ๏ธ Smaller max drawdown = less worst-case pain
- ๐ Beta > 1 = more volatile than S&P 500
โ๏ธHead-to-Head Comparison
๐ DGRO wins this comparison
Key Factors
โถAdditional Metrics (5)
Bottom line: DGRO wins with better expense ratio. Consider DGRO for your portfolio, but SPY is still a solid choice if you prefer its specific advantages.
Detailed Overlap Analysis
217 shared holdings representing 43.1% portfolio overlap
Top Shared Holdings
| # | Stock | DGRO Weight | SPY Weight | Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | AAPL AAPL | 3.33% | 6.82% | 3.33% |
| 2 | MSFT MSFT | 2.85% | 6.11% | 2.85% |
| 3 | AVGO AVGO | 2.87% | 2.79% | 2.79% |
| 4 | JPM JPM | 3.07% | 1.51% | 1.51% |
| 5 | LLY LLY | 1.47% | 1.44% | 1.44% |
| 6 | V V | 0.87% | 1.01% | 0.87% |
| 7 | XOM XOM | 3.02% | 0.85% | 0.85% |
| 8 | JNJ JNJ | 3.22% | 0.84% | 0.84% |
| 9 | WMT WMT | 1.02% | 0.83% | 0.83% |
| 10 | ABBV ABBV | 2.80% | 0.68% | 0.68% |
Overlap by Sector
Showing top 5 sectors by overlap contribution
Top Holdings Only in DGRO
Unique to DGRO
| Symbol | Name | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| PCAR | PCAR | 0.17% |
| FERG | FERG | 0.16% |
| STZ | STZ | 0.14% |
| FNF | FNF | 0.11% |
| SYF | SYF | 0.11% |
Top Holdings Only in SPY
Unique to SPY
| Symbol | Name | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| NVDA | NVDA | 7.73% |
| AMZN | AMZN | 3.81% |
| GOOGL | GOOGL | 3.08% |
| GOOG | GOOG | 2.47% |
| META | META | 2.45% |
Price Correlation
How We Calculate Overlap
We use the minimum weight method with normalization to calculate portfolio overlap:
Overlap = ฮฃ min(weightA, weightB) for each shared holdingNormalization: Holdings weights are normalized to sum to 100% before comparison. This ensures accurate overlap calculations even when analyzing partial holdings data (e.g., top 50 positions).
Conservative approach: We consider only the smaller allocation for each shared position, giving you a realistic view of true portfolio overlap.
๐ This analysis is based on publicly available holdings data. For the most current and complete holdings information, please visit the official ETF provider websites.