Motley Fool's DGRO vs. VOO 20-Year Call, Examined

TL;DR: The Motley Fool published a prediction on October 28, 2026, that the iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF (DGRO) will beat the Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) over 20 years. Its case rests on concentration: the S&P 500's ten largest holdings make up 40% of its value, a level not seen since the 1960s.

What did The Motley Fool actually say?

The column argues that the index most investors treat as the default has become top-heavy. The Motley Fool says the S&P 500's 10 largest holdings currently comprise 40% of its value and that the index hasn't been this concentrated since the 1960s. It adds that VOO's own top 10 holdings are nearly 40% of the fund, with technology companies also around 40%.

An article published on AOL puts a finer point on it. It says VOO had a 30.8% weighting in just five stocks: Nvidia, Apple, Alphabet, Microsoft and Amazon.

This is one columnist's opinion, published as a prediction. It is not a forecast from the fund companies, and AIN makes no call on either fund.

What does this mean for an accredited investor?

If your public-market sleeve is a single S&P 500 fund, you may hold a bigger bet on a handful of technology names than the label suggests. AIN's earlier piece on how Mag 7 weight sits inside S&P 500 funds covers the same exposure from the downside first.

That matters when you size private deals. If you came to alternatives partly to avoid owning the same few companies as everyone else, check how much of that overlap you already carry. A second concentrated position in a private fund stacks on top of it.

Liquidity is the other half of the question. AIN's piece on private credit ETFs and the liquidity illusion makes the case that daily liquidity on illiquid assets will fail its first stress test. And why most angel investors lose money looks at the portfolio pattern that changes the outcome.

Why does the 1960s comparison matter?

The author's worry is what followed the last time the market was this concentrated. According to data from S&P Global cited by The Motley Fool, the S&P 500's annualized returns from 1965 to 1975 were just over 1%. The next decade was much stronger, at almost 11% annualized.

Period	S&P 500 annualized return	Source
1965 to 1975	Just over 1%	S&P Global data, via The Motley Fool
Following decade	Almost 11%	S&P Global data, via The Motley Fool
The 20 years combined	Around 6%	The Motley Fool's calculation

Roughly 6% a year is a weak stretch for equities. It hides one very bad decade and one very good one. Few investors would have found that ride easy to sit through. The column itself says the history doesn't guarantee the next 20 years will repeat it. One episode is a warning.

What is DGRO, and why does the column favor it?

The column's pick screens for positive earnings growth forecasts and a payout ratio below 75%, and it excludes the top 10% of stocks by yield.

The supporting number is long-run. The Motley Fool cites Ned Davis Research and Hartford Funds data showing dividend growers delivered a 10.2% annualized total return over the last 50 years. That figure describes dividend-growing stocks as a group over half a century. It does not describe DGRO's own record, and it says nothing about the next two decades.

How have dividend funds done against the S&P 500 lately?

The short-term picture is mixed and depends on the fund. 24/7 Wall St. reports that three dividend ETFs each beat the S&P 500 over the year ended October 23, 2026, when the iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) returned 14%.

Fund	1-year return	5-year return
DVY	18%	61%
SCHD	35%	62%
VYM	17%	72%
IVV (S&P 500)	14%	80%

None of these is DGRO, so they are context rather than evidence for the column's pick. Over five years, the S&P 500 fund still leads all three. A strong recent year for dividend funds hasn't erased the index's longer lead.

What mistakes do investors make with predictions like this?

The first is treating a 20-year call as a trade. A column written on one day in October can't know which decade the next 20 years will resemble. The second is comparing a fund's one-year return with another fund's 50-year group average, as if they measured the same thing. The third is swapping one concentration for another without checking what the replacement holds, what it charges, and what taxes its distributions create.

Before you rely on any column, this one included, verify the holdings and costs on the fund issuer's own page.

FAQ

Is the S&P 500 too concentrated right now? The Motley Fool says the index's 10 largest holdings make up 40% of its value, the highest concentration since the 1960s. Whether that is "too" concentrated depends on your other holdings and how much a drop in a few technology names would hurt you.

Did dividend ETFs beat the S&P 500 last year? According to 24/7 Wall St., DVY, SCHD and VYM each beat IVV's 14% return for the year ended October 23, 2026. All three trailed it over five years. DGRO was not part of that comparison.

How concentrated is VOO itself? According to The Motley Fool, VOO's 10 largest holdings make up nearly 40% of the fund, and technology companies are around 40% of its holdings. An article published on AOL puts five stocks at 30.8%.

Does the 1960s history prove DGRO will win? No. The column itself says the historical performance doesn't guarantee a repeat. It is an argument for owning less concentration, not proof that one specific fund will outperform.

What can you do today?

Open the holdings page for each equity fund you own and add up the top 10 positions across all of them. If one handful of companies makes up a large share of your total public portfolio, write that number down before you commit more money to any new fund, public or private.

Educational content only. Not investment, tax, or legal advice. Not an offer or solicitation to buy or sell securities. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Private-market investments are illiquid and involve risk of loss, including total loss of capital. Consult qualified advisers. Angel Investors Network is not a broker-dealer or investment adviser.