SDY vs SPYD: Yield, Cost and Returns Compared
As of Nov 7, 2026, SPYD yields more: 4.17% (dividend yield) against 2.35% for SDY. SPYD is cheaper to own at 0.07% a year vs 0.35%. Over the same 11 years (Oct 2015 to Oct 2026), SDY returned 10.4% a year with distributions reinvested, and SPYD 9.5%.
| Compared | SDY | SPYD |
|---|---|---|
| YieldDividend yield | 2.35% | 4.17% |
| Expense ratio | 0.35% | 0.07% |
| Total return, 1 yr | +20.2% | +20.6% |
| Total return, 3 yr (a year) | +15.8% | +18.7% |
| Total return, 5 yr (a year) | +8.3% | +8.7% |
| Total return, 10 yr (a year) | +10.3% | +8.9% |
| Worst drop since Oct 2015 | -25.1% | -36.6% |
| Share price since Oct 2015 | +107% | +63% |
| Pays | Quarterly | Quarterly |
| Issuer | State Street Investment Management | State Street Investment Management |
| Assets | $23.9B | $7.6B |
| Started | 2005 | 2015 |
| Type | Mid-Cap Value | Mid-Cap Value |
Higher yield
SPYD
4.17%
Lower cost
SPYD
0.07%
Better total return
SDY
10.4%/yr
Smaller worst drop
SDY
-25.1%
Key facts: SDY vs SPYD
Data as of · Source: SmarterDividends data
- As of Nov 7, 2026, SDY yields 2.35% (dividend yield) and SPYD yields 4.17% (dividend yield).
- SDY's expense ratio is 0.35% and SPYD's is 0.07%: $35 vs $7 a year on $10,000.
- From Oct 2015 to Oct 2026, $10,000 in SDY grew to $29,609 (10.4% a year) and $10,000 in SPYD to $27,105 (9.5% a year), distributions reinvested.
- Their worst month-end drops over that time: -25.1% for SDY and -36.6% for SPYD.
- 3 of SDY's top ten holdings are also in SPYD's top ten, an overlap of at least 5% of the fund.
Cite this page
SmarterDividends, "SDY vs SPYD: Yield, Cost and Returns Compared," updated Nov 7, 2026, https://smarterdividends.com/compare/sdy-vs-spyd
$10,000 in each, Oct 2015 to Oct 2026
Distributions reinvested, month-end values, with the S&P 500 for reference.
SDY became
$29,609
10.4% a year
SPYD became
$27,105
9.5% a year
Year by year
| Year | SDY | SPYD |
|---|---|---|
| 2025 | +8.2% | +4.6% |
| 2024 | +8.4% | +15.3% |
| 2023 | +2.6% | +3.9% |
| 2022 | −0.5% | −1.2% |
| 2021 | +25.3% | +32.7% |
| 2020 | +1.7% | −11.6% |
| 2019 | +23.3% | +21.2% |
| 2018 | −2.7% | −4.9% |
| 2017 | +15.8% | +12.7% |
| 2016 | +20.3% | +24.6% |
Total return each calendar year, distributions reinvested.
Top holdings
3 of the top ten overlap, at least 5% of each fund.
SDY
- ACN Accenture PLC Class A4.0%
- VZ Verizon Communications Inc2.8%
- CVX Chevron Corp2.2%
- O Realty Income Corp1.9%
- PEP PepsiCo Inc1.8%
- MDT Medtronic PLC1.8%
- TGT Target Corp1.6%
- ADP Automatic Data Processing Inc1.5%
- NKE Nike Inc Class B1.5%
- XOM ExxonMobil Holdings Corp1.5%
SPYD
- ACN Accenture PLC Class A2.4%
- HAS Hasbro Inc1.7%
- PFE Pfizer Inc1.6%
- CVX Chevron Corp1.6%
- MDT Medtronic PLC1.5%
- SWK Stanley Black & Decker Inc1.5%
- EOG EOG Resources Inc1.5%
- HPQ HP Inc1.5%
- CCI Crown Castle Inc1.5%
- AMT American Tower Corp1.4%
SDY vs SPYD: questions
Is SDY or SPYD better?
It depends on the job. SPYD pays more today (4.17% vs 2.35%), SPYD costs less, and SDY has the better total return over Oct 2015 to Oct 2026, with SDY holding up better in its worst stretch. For income, look at yield and whether the payouts hold up; for growth, total return and drawdowns.
Which pays a higher dividend, SDY or SPYD?
SPYD, at 4.17% against 2.35% for SDY as of Nov 7, 2026. On $10,000 that's about $417 vs $235 a year at today's rates.
Which has the better total return?
SDY. From Oct 2015 to Oct 2026, it returned 10.4% a year with distributions reinvested, against 9.5% for SPYD. $10,000 became $29,609 vs $27,105.
Which is cheaper, SDY or SPYD?
SPYD, with a 0.07% expense ratio against 0.35%.
Do SDY and SPYD hold the same things?
Partly. 3 of their top ten holdings match (ACN, CVX, MDT), at least 5% of each fund. Owning both doubles up on those.
Related comparisons
Yields, costs and holdings as each fund reports them (via Yahoo Finance), updated daily; returns from month-end prices with distributions reinvested. SPYD leads on 5 of 8 measures above. For information only, not investment advice. Last fund data: Nov 7, 2026.
