DGRO vs XLF: Complete Comparison

iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF vs Financial Select Sector SPDR Fund โ€” overlap, correlation, performance & risk analysis

Holdings Overlap
18.26%
Very Low Overlap
Shared Holdings
47 of 75
Complete portfolio analysis
Calculation Method
Min Weight
Weighted intersection

Visual Overlap

DGRO
XLF
18.3%
DGRO Only
Overlap
XLF Only

Price Performance

Historical price comparison over 3M

DGRO Return
+7.13%
XLF Return
+6.68%
Winner
DGRO
+0.45%
Max Drawdown
DGRO: -2.9%
XLF: -5.6%
DGRO Volatility (annualized)9.14%
XLF Volatility (annualized)13.17%

๐Ÿ“ˆ Comparison

Metric
DGRO
XLF
1 Year Return
+22.5%
+28.5%โœ“
3 Year Return
+9.5%
+10.5%โœ“
5 Year Return
+13.8%
+14.8%โœ“
Volatility
17.80%โœ“
21.50%
Expense Ratio
0.08%โœ“
0.10%
โš ๏ธ Past performance does not guarantee future results. Data may be delayed.

โš ๏ธRisk Metrics

Metric
DGRO
XLF
Volatility
17.80%โœ“
21.50%
Sharpe Ratio
0.72โœ“
0.65
Sortino Ratio
0.98โœ“
0.88
Max Drawdown
-34.20%โœ“
-55.20%
Beta
0.92
1.12

Interpretation:

  • ๐Ÿ“Š Lower volatility = smoother ride
  • โšก Higher Sharpe/Sortino = better risk-adjusted returns
  • โš ๏ธ Smaller max drawdown = less worst-case pain
  • ๐Ÿ“ˆ Beta > 1 = more volatile than S&P 500

โš”๏ธ Comparison

10 - 5

๐Ÿ† DGRO wins this comparison

Key Factors

๐Ÿ’ฐ Expense Ratio
DGRO:0.08%โœ“
vs
XLF:0.10%โœ“
๐ŸŽฏ Number of Holdings
DGRO:420 holdingsโœ“
vs
XLF:68 holdingsโœ“
๐Ÿ“ˆ 5-Year Return
DGRO:+13.8%
vs
XLF:+14.8%
โ–ถAdditional Metrics (5)
โš–๏ธ Concentration Risk
DGRO: 27.1% in top 10โœ“
XLF: 55.7% in top 10
๐Ÿ“Š Assets Under Management
DGRO: $28B
XLF: $40Bโœ“
โšก Sharpe Ratio
DGRO: 0.72
XLF: 0.65
๐Ÿ“‰ Volatility
DGRO: 17.8%โœ“
XLF: 21.5%
๐Ÿ” Uniqueness vs SPY
DGRO: 56.9% unique
XLF: 86.3% uniqueโœ“

Bottom line: DGRO wins with better expense ratio and number of holdings. Consider DGRO for your portfolio, but XLF is still a solid choice if you prefer its specific advantages.

Detailed Overlap Analysis

47 shared holdings representing 18.3% portfolio overlap

Top Shared Holdings

#StockDGRO WeightXLF WeightOverlap
1
JPM
JPM
3.07%10.82%3.07%
2
BAC
BAC
1.75%4.78%1.75%
3
MS
MS
1.33%2.84%1.33%
4
GS
GS
1.30%3.47%1.30%
5
C
C
1.14%2.64%1.14%
6
V
V
0.87%7.26%0.87%
7
USB
USB
0.75%1.05%0.75%
8
BLK
BLK
0.63%2.02%0.63%
9
PNC
PNC
0.59%1.04%0.59%
10
MA
MA
0.52%5.81%0.52%

Overlap by Sector

Financials
13 stocks ยท 12.77% overlap
Other
34 stocks ยท 5.41% overlap

Showing top 5 sectors by overlap contribution

47
Shared Stocks
18.3%
Total Overlap
2
Sectors Represented

Top Holdings Only in DGRO

Unique to DGRO

โ†Scroll horizontally to see all dataโ†’
SymbolNameWeight
AAPLAAPL3.33%
JNJJNJ3.22%
XOMXOM3.02%
AVGOAVGO2.87%
MSFTMSFT2.85%

Top Holdings Only in XLF

Unique to XLF

โ†Scroll horizontally to see all dataโ†’
SymbolNameWeight
BRK-BBRK-B11.80%
WFCWFC3.73%
SCHWSCHW2.10%
COFCOF1.93%
PGRPGR1.74%

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 holding

Normalization: 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.

๐Ÿ“Š This analysis is based on publicly available holdings data. For the most current and complete holdings information, please visit the official ETF provider websites.

Related Articles

Compare More ETFs