DGRO(DGRO)
AI Look-Through Summary
AI GeneratedThe DGRO ETF presents a distinct divergence from traditional growth-oriented dividend strategies, characterized by an unusually high allocation to large-cap technology and healthcare equities relative to its defensive naming convention. Despite the fund's focus on income generation, nearly 17% of total assets are concentrated within just two sectors: Technology at 9.1% and Healthcare at 7.5%. This heavy weighting is driven by significant exposure to mega-cap growth leaders such as Broadcom, Apple, Microsoft, Johnson & Johnson, and AbbVie, which collectively form the core of the portfolio's yield profile alongside more traditional defensive names like Procter & Gamble and Philip Morris International.
Geographically, while specific country breakdowns are not provided in the dataset, the sector composition suggests a predominantly North American tilt with substantial exposure to U.S.-listed multinational corporations that dominate their respective global industries. The top ten holdings alone account for approximately 27% of the fund's assets under management, indicating moderate concentration risk where performance is heavily reliant on the valuation trajectories and dividend policies of these specific mega-cap giants. With $37.5 billion in assets, the ETF possesses significant scale, yet its sector distribution reveals that it functions more as a large-cap blend than a pure-play defensive vehicle, offering investors exposure to cyclical growth drivers wrapped within an income-focused structure.
Quantitatively, the fund's profile implies a potential for higher volatility compared to peers strictly adhering to low-beta or non-cyclical sectors, given the presence of volatile tech and energy components like ExxonMobil alongside stable utilities and consumer staples. The interplay between high-growth technology stocks and established dividend payers creates a unique risk-reward dynamic that may appeal to investors seeking growth-at-a-reasonable-price characteristics while maintaining an income mandate. Ultimately, the fund's performance will likely track closely with the broader health of the U.S. large-cap market rather than providing insulation from sector-specific downturns in technology or healthcare.
Generated by Qwen-32B from constituent-level data. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-21 22:04:16.633109+00
🔍 Theme Alignment Audit
AI GeneratedPurity: 85/100The thematic alignment of DGRO is characterized by a strong concentration in defensive sectors, specifically healthcare and consumer staples, which supports its designation as a low-volatility or income-oriented strategy. However, the presence of significant technology holdings such as AVGO, AAPL, and MSFT introduces elements that are often associated with growth rather than pure defensiveness, creating a nuanced mix within the portfolio. While these tech giants provide stability through their market dominance, they diverge from traditional defensive narratives found in utilities or consumer staples alone, suggesting the fund employs a broad-based approach to capture quality earnings across various industries rather than adhering strictly to a narrow definition of defense.
Sector weights reveal a coherent structure where healthcare and consumer defensives form the core, yet the inclusion of financial services and energy dilutes the sector purity expected from a purely defensive vehicle. The top-10 concentration of 26.5% indicates that while no single holding dominates excessively, the portfolio relies heavily on large-cap entities to generate returns, which may blur the line between a thematic fund and a broad market index with a tilt toward quality factors. This reliance on mega-caps across diverse sectors suggests the strategy prioritizes stability through size and profitability metrics over strict sector exclusivity, resulting in a hybrid profile that balances defensive characteristics with exposure to high-conviction large-cap growth names.
AI analysis of holdings alignment vs fund theme. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-21 02:59:08.658997+00
🏢 Sector Analysis
AI GeneratedThe sector allocation of DGRO presents a distinctively conservative profile, characterized by an overwhelming absence of cyclical growth sectors and a heavy weighting toward defensive industries. With Technology comprising only 9.1% and Healthcare at 7.5%, the fund deliberately minimizes exposure to high-beta assets that typically drive volatility during market downturns. This structural choice suggests an investment thesis prioritized on capital preservation and income stability rather than aggressive total return generation through growth stock appreciation. The minimal representation of Financial Services, Energy, and Consumer Defensive sectors further reinforces a strategy designed to navigate economic uncertainty by avoiding industries most sensitive to interest rate fluctuations or commodity price swings.
Concentration risk within the portfolio is notably muted, evidenced by a Top-10 concentration metric of just 26.5%. This low level indicates that while individual large-cap names like AVGO and JPM constitute significant positions relative to their specific sectors, they do not dominate the broader fund universe to an extent that would skew overall performance significantly if those single stocks underperformed. The distribution across only five distinct sectors with small holding counts per sector implies a broad diversification strategy intended to smooth out idiosyncratic risks associated with any single company or industry cycle.
In terms of factor tilts, the data points strongly toward a low-volatility and value-oriented approach rather than momentum or high-growth strategies. The exclusion of major growth engines like Technology beyond its core defensive components aligns with an objective to reduce portfolio beta. By maintaining such small allocations across traditional cyclical leaders while keeping top holdings diversified within their respective niches, the fund structure reflects a mandate focused on steady compounding and downside protection rather than capturing outsized upside from market rallies in high-growth areas.
AI-generated sector analysis from constituent-level data. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-23 19:05:59.558644+00
Flow Driver Analysis
2-Step CircleWhich larger ETFs share DGRO's holdings — and mechanically drive its price through index rebalancing flows?
Approximately 100% of DGRO's weight flows through these larger ETFs
| Driver ETF | AUM | Expense | Shared Stocks | Weight Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SPTMSPTM | $12B | — | 10 | 26.5% |
| SPYState Street SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust | $640B | 0.09% | 10 | 26.5% |
| ACWIiShares MSCI ACWI ETF | $28B | — | 10 | 26.5% |
| SCHXSCHX | $61B | — | 10 | 26.5% |
| VOOVanguard S&P 500 ETF | $1.5T | 0.03% | 10 | 26.5% |
27% of DGRO's portfolio by weight is also held by SPTM. When SPTM receives inflows, it mechanically buys these shared stocks — dragging DGRO's NAV along regardless of any thematic or sector catalyst. Combined, the top 5 overlapping ETFs control exposure to 100% ofDGRO's weight.
Overlap computed from constituent-level holdings data across 5 ETFs. Price co-movement with driver ETFs is structural, not coincidental. Not investment advice.
ETF Look-Through Dashboard
Replaces $249/yr MorningstarPeer through the ETF wrapper to see exactly what you own. Every metric is computed from constituent-level data.
Herfindahl-Hirschman Concentration Index
Morningstar-Style Box
Sector & Cap Explorer
ETF Fundamental Radar
Operational health is mixed, with the bulk of weight in the mid-range (4–6) Piotroski scores.
Piotroski F-Score (Operational Health)
Score 0-9: Measures Profitability, Leverage, and Efficiency
Based on 27% of fund weight with Piotroski data.
Computed by rolling up individual stock Piotroski F-Scores, Altman Z-Scores, and Beneish M-Scores weighted by each constituent's allocation. Data that Vanguard and BlackRock don't surface.
Dividend Safety True-Up
DeterministicThe dividend-paying companies inside DGRO collectively pay out 53% of their Free Cash Flow to maintain the current yield. This is a sustainable payout level with moderate room for dividend growth. Based on 23% of fund weight in dividend-paying stocks.
FCF Payout Ratio = Dividends Paid / Free Cash Flow, weighted by constituent allocation. Not investment advice.
Earnings vs. Price Decomposition
ProprietaryDGRO is up 22.9% over the last 12 months. The underlying weighted earnings growth of its constituents is +50.3%. Despite earnings growth, valuations have contracted by 27.4% — the market is paying less per dollar of earnings than a year ago.
Earnings growth = weighted average YoY EPS growth of all constituents (capped at ±500% to limit outlier distortion). Based on 27% of fund weight with earnings data. Not investment advice.
Value Creation Map
ROIC vs WACCWhat percentage of DGRO's weight is allocated to companies that create economic value (ROIC > WACC) vs. destroy it?
Of DGRO's analyzed weight, 100% is invested in companies earning more than their cost of capital — genuine value creators. The remaining 0% consists of companies whose ROIC falls below their WACC, effectively destroying shareholder value with every dollar invested.
ROIC-WACC spread for 23% of fund weight with available data. Not investment advice.
Passive Crowding Score
MODERATEHow much of each constituent's market cap is structurally locked in passive ETFs — a proxy for liquidity fragility during sell-offs.
DGRO has a Passive Crowding Score of 41/100. On average, 12.2% of the market capitalization of DGRO's underlying holdings is structurally locked in passive ETF vehicles. This indicates moderate passive ownership density. Index rebalances and ETF creation/redemption activity can amplify short-term volatility in the underlying holdings.
Passive $ = Σ(ETF AUM × holding weight) across all 48 tracked ETFs. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds). Not investment advice.
Under the Hood — Top 10 Constituents
| # | Ticker | Company | Weight | P/E | F-Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | AVGO | Broadcom Inc Technology | 3.25% | 86.9x | 8/9 |
| 2 | JPM | JPMorgan Chase & Co Financial Services | 3.04% | 14.3x | 3/9 |
| 3 | AAPL | Apple Inc Technology | 2.93% | 37.7x | 8/9 |
| 4 | MSFT | Microsoft Corp Technology | 2.91% | 26.8x | 5/9 |
| 5 | XOM | Exxon Mobil Corp Energy | 2.90% | 24.5x | 5/9 |
| 6 | JNJ | Johnson & Johnson Healthcare | 2.64% | 26.1x | 4/9 |
| 7 | ABBV | AbbVie Inc Healthcare | 2.52% | 106.2x | 7/9 |
| 8 | UNH | UnitedHealth Group Inc Healthcare | 2.31% | 28.7x | 6/9 |
| 9 | PG | Procter & Gamble Co Consumer Defensive | 2.07% | 21.0x | 6/9 |
| 10 | PM | Philip Morris International Inc Consumer Defensive | 1.94% | 25.0x | 8/9 |
Historical Holdings Snapshots
Browse how DGRO’s holdings have changed across SEC filing dates. Showing top holdings per snapshot.
2026-05-24
10 holdings · 26.5% tracked weight2026-05-23
10 holdings · 26.5% tracked weight2026-05-22
10 holdings · 26.5% tracked weight2026-05-21
10 holdings · 26.5% tracked weight2026-05-20
10 holdings · 26.5% tracked weightSource: SEC filings and fund provider disclosures. Shows last 6 snapshot dates, top 15 holdings per date by weight.
Risk Profile
Sharpe = risk-adjusted return (higher is better). Computed from 1,200+ trading days with 5% risk-free rate.
Price Chart with Moving Averages
What Drove DGRO Today?
Daily return attribution — which holdings contributed most (and least) to the fund's move.
Technical Setup
AI GeneratedThe current trading price of $73.79 for DGRO represents a specific market snapshot that requires contextual comparison against moving averages to determine trend direction, though those average values are not provided in the available data. Without knowing whether this price sits above or below key short-term and long-term moving averages, it is impossible to definitively characterize the prevailing momentum as bullish or bearish based solely on these figures. The absence of Relative Strength Index (RSI) data further limits the ability to gauge short-term overbought or oversold conditions, leaving a gap in understanding immediate velocity and potential exhaustion points within the current trading session. In isolation, a single price point offers limited insight into broader technical patterns that typically guide market participants regarding asset valuation relative to recent history. To form a complete picture of trend strength, one would need to observe how consistently this $73.79 level holds against established moving averages over time rather than just at the present moment. The lack of historical price context or oscillator readings means any assessment of whether momentum is accelerating or decelerating remains speculative without additional data points that reveal the slope and stability of recent performance trajectories.
Underwater (Drawdown from Peak)
How far below the all-time high the price has been over time. Deeper = more pain for holders.
Rolling 60-Day Beta vs S&P 500 (VOO)
How the ETF's sensitivity to market moves changes over time. β > 1 = more volatile than the market.
Yield & Income
Sector Drift Over Time
How DGRO’s sector allocation has shifted across snapshots. Use the slider to travel through time.
Active Conviction Tracker
Shares bought and sold between the latest two data snapshots — reveals what the fund manager is actually doing.
Explore More
Quant metrics computed deterministically from financial statements and price data. Updated: 2026-06-02.
SecuritiesDB is for informational purposes only. Not investment advice.