SCHD vs VYM vs HDV vs DGRO — The Four-Pack
By divcalc Editorial · Last reviewed June 4, 2026 · Methodology
Four US dividend ETFs come up in almost every "which one should I buy" thread: SCHD, VYM, HDV, and DGRO. From the outside they look similar — US large-cap dividend ETFs, quarterly distributions, expense ratios between 0.06% and 0.08%, all marketed as "core" dividend holdings. They produce meaningfully different outcomes because they screen for different things.
This guide breaks the four down by index methodology, current numbers side-by-side, sector tilts that headline metrics don't surface, and the investor profile each one fits.
1. The screens — what each fund is actually doing
| Fund | Underlying index | Filter | Quality screen | Holdings | ER |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SCHD | Dow Jones US Dividend 100 | Yield + DGR rank | ROE, debt/equity, cash flow stability | ~100 | 0.06% |
| VYM | FTSE High Dividend Yield | Above-median forecast yield | none | 400–500 | 0.06% |
| HDV | Morningstar Dividend Yield Focus | Yield rank | Wide- or narrow-moat only | ~75 | 0.08% |
| DGRO | Morningstar US Dividend Growth | ≥5 yr consecutive hikes | Top-10% yield excluded; payout ≤75% | ~440 | 0.08% |
Three readings:
- VYM is the broadest and simplest. A single yield filter, no quality screen, no growth requirement, 400+ names. The closest thing in the four to a yield-tilted total market index.
- SCHD and DGRO both screen for growth — but differently. SCHD ranks the qualifying universe by yield and DGR, then takes the top 100 with a single-stock weight cap. DGRO requires only five consecutive years of hikes but excludes the top-decile yields (an anti-trap screen) and caps payout at 75% (an anti-fragility screen), keeping the entire qualifying basket.
- HDV is the concentrated quality approach. A moat filter (Morningstar's wide-or-narrow-moat classification) plus yield ranking produces a tight ~75-name basket, structurally weighted toward sectors where Morningstar identifies moats.
→ The full DGR formula and how each fund's screen affects projected yield-on-cost: How to Calculate Dividend Growth Rate.
2. Current numbers, side-by-side
The same four metrics from The Four Metrics That Matter applied to all four funds. Snapshot from the live data refresh:
| Fund | Forward yield | 5-yr DGR | 10-yr DGR | 5-yr price growth | 10-yr price growth |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SCHD | 3.25% | 9.15%/yr | 10.6%/yr | 4.85%/yr | 9.2%/yr |
| VYM | 2.21% | 3.79%/yr | 5.0%/yr | 8.27%/yr | 8.5%/yr |
| HDV | 2.91% | 1.85%/yr | 3.1%/yr | 6.72%/yr | 5.4%/yr |
| DGRO | 1.96% | 7.11%/yr | — | 8.15%/yr | 10.7%/yr |
(DGRO launched mid-2014; the 10-year DGR engine requires a clean starting endpoint a full eleven calendar years back, which DGRO's partial-year inception data does not yet provide. The 10-year price growth uses a different calculation and is unaffected.)
What jumps out:
- SCHD pays the highest yield and has grown its dividend the fastest of the four. That combination is unusual — most funds trade one off for the other. The 9%+ DGR is what makes SCHD the modal "which dividend ETF" answer.
- VYM has the strongest 5-year price growth among the three older funds and the weakest dividend growth. The simple yield screen lets in slow-grower mature payers; the broad-market exposure picks up the appreciation.
- HDV has the weakest DGR across both windows. Over the past decade HDV also has the weakest price growth of the four (5.4%/yr); over the most recent five years SCHD's price growth has actually lagged HDV's, partly reflecting SCHD's 2022–24 underperformance versus the more energy-heavy basket. The moat-screened-plus-yield methodology has been a multi-year headwind across both regimes — energy-sector dividend pressure and a tech-led market rally — but the relative ranking shifts depending on the window.
- DGRO has the lowest current yield, second-fastest DGR, and the strongest 10-year price growth. It is structurally the closest of the four to a "broad market with a quality dividend overlay."
3. The sector tilts — the hidden differentiator
Headline yield and DGR don't reveal what each fund is actually exposed to. The sector mix is where the funds diverge most:
- SCHD: financials, consumer staples, healthcare are typically the largest sector weights; energy is light; tech is very light, primarily because most large-cap tech yields are too low to rank in the top 100 on the combined yield-plus-DGR screen — even names with long dividend histories like Apple and Microsoft typically do not clear the yield ranking.
- VYM: financials and energy carry meaningful weight, consumer staples and healthcare are well represented; tech weight is modest. The breadth (400+ holdings) means no single sector dominates.
- HDV: the most concentrated of the four. Energy, healthcare, and consumer staples often combine to more than half the fund; financials and industrials are light. The top-ten holdings are dominated by large mature payers from those sectors.
- DGRO: closest of the four to broad-market sector distribution. Healthcare, financials, and tech are all meaningful weights — Microsoft and Apple are consistently among the largest holdings, which neither SCHD nor HDV can say.
The "right" sector mix depends on your overall portfolio. If you also hold a broad-market fund (VOO or VTI), you already have heavy tech and growth exposure, and SCHD's tech-light tilt becomes a feature rather than a bug — it complements rather than duplicates. If a dividend ETF is your only US large-cap holding, DGRO's broader sector spread gives more diversified exposure.
4. Four investor profiles
The matching is reasonably clean once you know what you want:
-
"I want the most dividend and the most DGR in a single fund." → SCHD. The structural combination of 10-year history + ranked yield + ranked DGR is built to deliver exactly that. Accept the tighter 100-name basket and the tech-light tilt.
-
"I want broad-market dividend exposure at the lowest fee, with the simplest mental model." → VYM. One filter, 400+ holdings, no quality screen, no growth screen. The trade-off is slow dividend growth — the screen lets in mature flat-payers. If you're combining with a broad-market fund anyway, VYM's redundancy may not bother you; if dividend growth matters, look elsewhere in this list.
-
"I want concentrated moat-screened quality and accept sector concentration." → HDV. The Morningstar moat-plus-yield methodology produces a structurally different basket from the other three — heavier energy, healthcare, and consumer staples; lighter financials and industrials. The historical DGR has lagged the other three, partly because the moat-rated yield universe is narrow and the energy concentration was a multi-year drag.
-
"I want the broadest growth-screened basket with explicit anti-trap protections." → DGRO. The 5-year-hike requirement is shorter than SCHD's 10-year history, but the top-10% yield exclusion and 75% payout cap are explicit screens against the two most common dividend-cut signals. Accept the lower current yield in exchange for a wider 440-name basket and stronger sector diversification.
5. Should I hold more than one?
The most common version of this question is "should I hold SCHD plus DGRO" or "should I split between SCHD and VYM." For most investors, the answer is no.
The funds share enough top holdings that pairing two of them does not materially diversify the dividend stream or smooth the distribution trajectory. Published overlap tools typically show SCHD and DGRO sharing around a third of names by weight, SCHD and VYM sharing around a quarter, and SCHD and HDV around fifteen percent — the precise numbers shift each quarter as funds rebalance, but the order of magnitude is consistent: meaningful overlap. Combining duplicates holdings without adding meaningful new exposure.
The exception is when you specifically want sector exposure that one fund underweights. SCHD's light energy weight paired with HDV's heavy energy weight produces a more balanced sector mix than either alone — at the cost of duplicated names and a higher blended expense ratio. This is a niche case for an investor who has a specific view on energy and wants the dividend mechanism to express it.
The cleaner default for most accumulator portfolios is one dividend ETF plus one broad-market ETF (VOO or VTI). The dividend ETF gives you the income tilt; the broad-market ETF gives you the full market exposure. Two dividend ETFs solve a problem most portfolios don't have.
Bottom line
The four funds split into three rough lanes. VYM is the broadest and simplest, with the lowest dividend growth as the cost of that simplicity. SCHD and DGRO are the two growth-screened options — SCHD with higher current yield and faster DGR on a tighter basket, DGRO with broader exposure and explicit anti-trap screens on a lower starting yield. HDV is the concentrated quality approach, structurally different from the other three because of the moat filter.
For most US dividend investors picking from this list, the choice is SCHD by default, with the other three as alternatives in specific situations: VYM for breadth and simplicity, HDV for moat-screened concentration, DGRO for the broadest growth-screened basket with anti-trap protections. The four-pack comparison is the right comparison to run before picking a US dividend ETF; once you've made it through this list, you've made the structural decision.
→ Run the four side-by-side on the SCHD calculator, VYM calculator, HDV calculator, and DGRO calculator — same inputs, four output curves.