DGRE vs IVV
WisdomTree Emerging Markets Quality Dividend Growth Fund vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, DGRE or IVV?
Each has led over a different period.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. DGRE led over 1Y and 3Y, IVV over 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 38.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 42.2%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | DGRE | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.32% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $145M | $896.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.39% | 1.10% |
| Holdings | 282 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +22.92%Best | +13.59% |
| 1Y Return | +35.75%Best | +17.54% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.70%Best | +22.46% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.25% | +13.28%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.2% | 14.4%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -40.0% | -33.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $15,563 | $18,654Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 42.2% | 38.9%Best |
| Fund Family | WisdomTree Investments | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Aug 1, 2013 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 1, 2013 to Oct 14, 2026 (13.2 years).
DGRE vs IVV growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 13.2 years both funds cover.
DGRE vs IVV Performance
WisdomTree Emerging Markets Quality Dividend Growth Fund (DGRE) is an ETF from WisdomTree Investments and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year DGRE returned +35.75% while IVV returned +17.54%. Year to date, DGRE is up 22.92% versus a gain of 13.59% for IVV.
Over three years, DGRE compounded at +22.70% per year against +22.46% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +9.25% and +13.28% respectively. Across the full 13-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +12.76% annualized vs +4.27%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
DGRE has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.2% compared with 14.4% for IVV. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -40.0% for DGRE and -33.9% for IVV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.68. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
DGRE charges 0.32% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $32 vs $3 annually, a gap of $29 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, DGRE currently yields 1.39% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
95.2% of DGRE's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 57.5% of IVV's money is in holdings DGRE also owns.
Most of DGRE is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
137 positions in common, counted across the 198 positions we hold weights for in DGRE and 506 in IVV, against full books of 282 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 363 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for DGRE (42.0% of the fund), and 61 for DGRE that do not appear in IVV (4.5%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in DGRE | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 8.02% | 5.76% | 2.26% |
| NVDANvidia Corp. | 5.00% | 8.44% | 3.44% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 5.96% | 7.29% | 1.33% |
| XOMExxonmobil Holdings Corp Common Stock Usd | 5.08% | 1.02% | 4.06% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.34% | 2.47% | 0.87% |
| GOOGLAlphabet, Inc. - Class a | 1.78% | 3.00% | 1.22% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 3.70% | 0.69% | 3.01% |
| METAMeta Platforms, Inc. | 1.79% | 2.42% | 0.63% |
| GOOGAlphabate, Inc Class C | 1.65% | 2.41% | 0.76% |
| KOCoca Cola Co. | 3.12% | 0.50% | 2.62% |
95.2% of DGRE is already inside IVV.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, DGRE or IVV?
DGRE has an expense ratio of 0.32% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $29 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, DGRE or IVV?
Over the past year DGRE returned +35.75% vs +17.54% for IVV, so DGRE leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (13 years), DGRE annualized +4.27% vs +12.76% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, DGRE or IVV?
DGRE has been the more volatile fund at 17.2% annualized versus 14.4% for IVV. Worst drawdown: DGRE -40.0% vs IVV -33.9%.
Should I hold both DGRE and IVV?
DGRE and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.68, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between DGRE and IVV?
95.2% of DGRE's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 57.5% of IVV's is in holdings DGRE also owns. They hold 137 positions in common, counted across the 198 positions we hold weights for in DGRE and 506 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, DGRE or IVV?
DGRE yields 1.39% while IVV yields 1.10%, so DGRE currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than DGRE?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. DGRE led over 1Y and 3Y, IVV over 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 38.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 42.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.