EQTY vs HIDV
Kovitz Core Equity ETF vs AB US High Dividend ETF
Which is better, EQTY or HIDV?
HIDV has been ahead.
HIDV has a lower expense ratio. HIDV led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. HIDV is less concentrated, with 34.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 42.1%.
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 | EQTY | HIDV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.99% | 0.35%Best |
| AUM | $1.4B | $200M |
| Dividend Yield | 0.02% | 2.23% |
| Holdings | 39 | 108 |
| YTD Return | +9.57% | +12.98%Best |
| 1Y Return | +14.75% | +18.40%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +17.58% | +21.53%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.5% | 12.4%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -17.3%Best | -18.8% |
| $10,000 over 3.6 years | $18,124 | $20,189Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 42.1% | 34.8%Best |
| Fund Family | Kovitz Investment Group | AllianceBernstein L.P. |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Dec 28, 2011 | Mar 22, 2023 |
Not shown on this pair: 5Y Return (annualized).
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.6 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Mar 22, 2023 to Oct 13, 2026 (3.6 years).
EQTY vs HIDV 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 3.6 years both funds cover.
EQTY vs HIDV Performance
Kovitz Core Equity ETF (EQTY) is an ETF from Kovitz Investment Group and AB US High Dividend ETF (HIDV) is an ETF from AllianceBernstein L.P.. Over the past year EQTY returned +14.75% while HIDV returned +18.40%. Year to date, EQTY is up 9.57% versus a gain of 12.98% for HIDV.
Over three years, EQTY compounded at +17.58% per year against +21.53% for HIDV. Across the full 4-year window we track, HIDV has the edge at +21.55% annualized vs +17.96%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
EQTY has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 12.5% compared with 12.4% for HIDV. 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 -17.3% for EQTY and -18.8% for HIDV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.91. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
EQTY charges 0.99% per year while HIDV charges 0.35%. On a $10,000 position that is $99 vs $35 annually, a gap of $64 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, EQTY currently yields 0.02% against 2.23% for HIDV.
Holdings Overlap
27.0% of EQTY's money is in holdings HIDV also owns. 22.4% of HIDV's money is in holdings EQTY also owns.
EQTY and HIDV share little of their money.
10 positions in common, counted across the 38 positions we hold weights for in EQTY and 105 in HIDV, against full books of 39 and 108.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 89 positions for HIDV that do not appear in our book for EQTY (73.9% of the fund), and 27 for EQTY that do not appear in HIDV (65.9%).
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 EQTY | Weight in HIDV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 4.90% | 4.88% | 0.02% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 1.71% | 6.84% | 5.13% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.22% | 3.03% | 0.19% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 3.93% | 1.62% | 2.31% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 4.62% | 0.09% | 4.53% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 2.89% | 1.36% | 1.53% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 0.83% | 3.01% | 2.18% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 1.82% | 0.48% | 1.34% |
| BRK.BBerkshire Hathaway Inc Brk/B Us Equity | 1.55% | 0.59% | 0.96% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 1.51% | 0.49% | 1.02% |
27.0% of EQTY is already inside HIDV.
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, EQTY or HIDV?
EQTY has an expense ratio of 0.99% while HIDV charges 0.35%. HIDV is the cheaper option, by $64 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, EQTY or HIDV?
Over the past year EQTY returned +14.75% vs +18.40% for HIDV, so HIDV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), EQTY annualized +17.96% vs +21.55% for HIDV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, EQTY or HIDV?
EQTY has been the more volatile fund at 12.5% annualized versus 12.4% for HIDV. Worst drawdown: EQTY -17.3% vs HIDV -18.8%.
Should I hold both EQTY and HIDV?
EQTY and HIDV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between EQTY and HIDV?
27.0% of EQTY's money is in holdings HIDV also owns. 22.4% of HIDV's is in holdings EQTY also owns. They hold 10 positions in common, counted across the 38 positions we hold weights for in EQTY and 105 in HIDV.
Which pays a higher dividend, EQTY or HIDV?
EQTY yields 0.02% while HIDV yields 2.23%, so HIDV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is HIDV better than EQTY?
HIDV has a lower expense ratio. HIDV led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. HIDV is less concentrated, with 34.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 42.1%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.