SCHD vs DGRO: Which Dividend ETF Fits Which Job?
Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF and iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF, side by side — distributions, growth, returns and holdings from our live dataset.
| Metric | SCHD | DGRO |
|---|---|---|
| Distribution yield | 2.88% | 1.66% |
| Forward annual (per share) | $1.01 | $1.32 |
| Payment frequency | Quarterly | Quarterly |
| Distribution growth, 1-yr | 5.4% | 4.7% |
| Distribution growth, 3-yr (CAGR) | 7.0% | 7.5% |
| Distribution growth, 5-yr (CAGR) | 9.1% | 7.1% |
| Consecutive annual increases | 14 | 11 |
| 1-yr return (incl. distributions) | 29.7% | 21.2% |
| Market cap | - | - |
| Last price | $35.11 | $79.61 |
| DividendRank | 57 | 47 |
Top-Holdings Overlap
Comparing each fund's top 25 and 25 stored positions, 8 names appear in both, and the shared positions account for about 14.3% of portfolio weight (summing the smaller weight of each shared name). Largest shared positions: MRK, HD, PG, KO, PEP, UNH, AMGN, ABT. A low overlap means the two funds genuinely own different portfolios — holding both adds variety; a high overlap means they largely duplicate each other.
What Each Fund Does
Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF (SCHD): This fund aims to closely emulate the overall financial performance of the Dow Jones U.S. Dividend 100 Index, accounting for no management fees or other operational expenses.
iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF (DGRO): The iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF is designed to mirror the investment performance of an underlying index. This index comprises U.S.-based companies that have a consistent history of increasing their dividend payouts.
Top 5 Holdings
| SCHD | Weight | DGRO | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| ABBOTT LABORATORIES | 4.86% | MICROSOFT | 3.31% |
| MERCK & CO INC | 4.82% | JOHNSON & JOHNSON | 3.15% |
| AMGEN INC | 4.75% | JPMORGAN CHASE & CO | 3.12% |
| COCA-COLA | 4.26% | ABBVIE | 3.04% |
| CHEVRON | 4.02% | EXXONMOBIL HOLDINGS CORP | 3.03% |
How to Read This Comparison
The two funds serve different jobs when their yields and growth rates diverge: a higher current yield usually trades away some growth or upside (covered-call funds cap rallies to fund their distributions), while a lower-yielding growth-screened fund aims to raise its payout over time. Neither profile is better in the abstract — they answer different needs, and this page presents the data without recommending either.
Expense ratios and total net assets are not part of our dataset, so they are not shown rather than estimated — check each issuer's page for those before comparing costs.
Related Pages
This research page is generated from Dividendly's structured market and dividend dataset using the approach described on our methodology and data sources pages. Data is automatically validated using defined rules and may also be periodically reviewed. Research only, not investment advice. Spotted a data error? Report it.