Overlap · from SEC filings
DGRW vs NOBL: what actually overlaps
DGRW and NOBL: 18.21% of a dollar ends up in the same companies either way (SEC Form N-PORT, 2026-06-30 and 2026-05-31), across 24 securities the two funds both hold. Every free comparison tool can list the tickers in common; this weights them, which is the part that decides whether owning both changes anything.
The short version
Held alone, DGRW behaves like 44.1 equally weighted positions and NOBL like 68.5. Held together in equal size they behave like 91.6 — 23.1 more than NOBL on its own, even at 18.21% overlap.
Overlap here is the sum, over securities both funds hold, of the smaller of the two weights: the share of a dollar that sits in the same company either way. Matching is on CUSIP. Figures are as of each fund's own reporting date (2026-06-30 and 2026-05-31), which do not always align.
Not 50/50, or holding a third fund alongside these two? The portfolio calculator runs this same math for any weights, across up to 12 funds.
Side by side
as filed| DGRW | NOBL | |
|---|---|---|
| Assets | $17B | $11B |
| Holdings | 198 | 70 |
| Effective holdings | 44.1 | 68.5 |
| Top ten weight | 36.14% | 16.58% |
| Largest position | 7.94% | 1.77% |
| Priced at market (Level 1) | 99.95% | 99.96% |
| Reporting date | 2026-06-30 | 2026-05-31 |
Where the overlap actually is
24The ten shared positions that account for the most of it, with what each fund holds of its own. Shared is the lesser of the two — the part that is held in common either way. Where the two columns diverge, one fund is making a larger bet on that company than the other, and holding both does not average it away.
| Company | DGRW | NOBL | Shared |
|---|---|---|---|
| CATERPILLAR INC | 1.798% | 1.608% | 1.608% |
| INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORP | 1.59% | 1.711% | 1.59% |
| ABBVIE INC | 2.071% | 1.56% | 1.56% |
| COCA-COLA COMPANY (THE) | 2.879% | 1.554% | 1.554% |
| JOHNSON & JOHNSON | 2.341% | 1.464% | 1.464% |
| EXXONMOBIL HOLDINGS CORP | 1.594% | 1.439% | 1.439% |
| PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY (THE) | 1.403% | 1.482% | 1.403% |
| CHEVRON CORP | 1.375% | 1.442% | 1.375% |
| MCDONALD'S CORP | 1.571% | 1.359% | 1.359% |
| WALMART INC | 0.934% | 1.312% | 0.934% |
What the difference is made of
78.51% · 65.25%78.51% of DGRW sits in companies NOBL does not hold at all, and 65.25% of NOBL in companies DGRW does not hold. The largest of each, by weight in its own fund:
- NVIDIA CORP
- MICROSOFT CORP
- APPLE INC
- META PLATFORMS INC
- UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC
- Nucor Corp.
- West Pharmaceutical Services, Inc.
- Archer-Daniels-Midland Co.
- Franklin Resources, Inc.
- Colgate-Palmolive Co.
By country of issuer
2026-06-30 · 2026-05-31Where each fund's money sits by the issuer country its filer reported (incorporation, not revenue). Two funds can share companies and still differ here, and a pair that looks diversified by name can be one country twice.
| Country | DGRW | NOBL | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 100.00% | 93.26% | +6.74 |
| Ireland° | 0.00% | 3.96% | −3.96 |
| Switzerland | 0.00% | 1.39% | −1.39 |
| Jersey° | 0.00% | 1.39% | −1.39 |
What each fund did last quarter
Each fund's newest filing against its previous one. A pair whose overlap is rising or falling does so because of these moves; the figures are the same ones on each fund's page and in its feed.
Written about this pair
1This page is the measurement. These essays argue about what it means, with the figures as they stood when each was written.
Related comparisons
1Other pairs involving DGRW or NOBL, ordered by how much they overlap.
| Pair | Overlap | Combined effective |
|---|---|---|
| NOBL vs SCHD | 14.62% | 74.9 |
Sources and limits
Computed from SEC Form N-PORT (NPORT-P), the portfolio report every registered US fund files. Positions below 0.001% of net assets are dropped; weights are normalised to each filing's own total.
Unit investment trusts including SPY and DIA do not file N-PORT, so no overlap can be computed for them. Where a comparison is missing from this site, that is usually why rather than an oversight.
Overlap says what is held in common, not what will move together. Two funds with no shared holdings can still fall together, and the effective holding count takes no account of correlation. All 275 pairs are in the concentration dataset, and every fund's own history is on its fund page.