DIVH vs VOO

DIVH vs VOO

Which is better, DIVH or VOO?

VOO costs less.

VOO has a lower expense ratio. DIVH is less concentrated, with 32.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.9%.

Lower Fees: VOOLess Concentrated: DIVH

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

MetricDIVHVOO
Expense Ratio0.67%0.03%Best
AUM$4M$1.0T
Dividend Yield0.12%1.06%
Holdings60506
YTD Return-2.39%+13.57%Best
1Y Return-+17.55%
3Y Return (annualized)-+22.46%
5Y Return (annualized)-+13.28%
Top 10 Weight32.7%Best37.9%
Fund FamilyIntegrity Viking FundsVanguard (US)
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap BlendLarge Cap Blend
InceptionSep 1, 2026Sep 7, 2010

Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.

DIVH vs VOO 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.

DIVH vs VOO Performance

Integrity Dividend Harvest ETF (DIVH) is an ETF from Integrity Viking Funds and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Year to date, DIVH is down 2.39% versus a gain of 13.57% for VOO.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Fees and Cost Over Time

DIVH charges 0.67% per year while VOO charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $67 vs $3 annually, a gap of $64 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, DIVH currently yields 0.12% against 1.06% for VOO.

Holdings Overlap

DIVH already in VOO85.9%
VOO already in DIVH17.0%

85.9% of DIVH's money is in holdings VOO also owns. 17.0% of VOO's money is in holdings DIVH also owns.

Most of DIVH is already inside VOO. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.

50 positions in common, counted across the 60 positions we hold weights for in DIVH and 504 in VOO, against full books of 60 and 506.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 449 positions for VOO that do not appear in our book for DIVH (82.8% of the fund), and 6 for DIVH that do not appear in VOO (6.8%).

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

StockWeight in DIVHWeight in VOODifference
AVGOBroadcom Inc4.63%2.65%1.98%
CVXChevron Corp3.99%0.58%3.41%
WMBWilliams Cos. Inc.4.38%0.14%4.24%
ABBVAbbvie Inc.3.62%0.69%2.93%
NEENextera Energy Inc3.02%0.26%2.76%
LLYEli Lilly & Co.1.55%1.38%0.17%
PEPPepsico Inc.2.56%0.29%2.27%
BMYBristol-Myers Squibb Co.2.62%0.21%2.41%
HPEHewlett Packard Enterprise Co2.71%0.10%2.61%
JPMJpmorgan Chase1.32%1.44%0.12%

85.9% of DIVH is already inside VOO.

You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.

DIVHVOO

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, DIVH or VOO?

DIVH has an expense ratio of 0.67% while VOO charges 0.03%. VOO is the cheaper option, by $64 a year on a $10,000 investment.

What is the holdings overlap between DIVH and VOO?

85.9% of DIVH's money is in holdings VOO also owns. 17.0% of VOO's is in holdings DIVH also owns. They hold 50 positions in common, counted across the 60 positions we hold weights for in DIVH and 504 in VOO.

Which pays a higher dividend, DIVH or VOO?

DIVH yields 0.12% while VOO yields 1.06%, so VOO currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is VOO better than DIVH?

VOO has a lower expense ratio. DIVH is less concentrated, with 32.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.