Video summary

Best Dividend Funds 2026: Defensive Enough? SCHD, VIG, VYM, FDVV, CGDV vs DGRO? (2026)

Main summary

Key takeaways

Finance

Finance-focused summary (context as of July 17, 2026)

The presenter (Markets with Marcus) compares six dividend ETFs, focusing on how each balances:

  • Income (distribution yield)
  • Growth (total return, including price appreciation)

The video concludes with “who should/shouldn’t” consider dividend funds in a portfolio.

Disclosures/cautions mentioned: - “All the numbers… as per July 17th, 2026” - “Past performance is not indicative of future results or outcomes” - Dividends are not guaranteed; dividend ETFs are still equity funds and carry stock downside risk. - “Not financial advice” is not stated in the subtitles, but multiple performance/risk disclaimers are included.

Tickers / assets / instruments mentioned

Dividend ETFs (main subject)

  • VIG — Vanguard Dividend Appreciation ETF
  • SCHD — Schwab US Dividend Equity ETF
  • VYM — Vanguard High Dividend Yield ETF
  • FDVV — Fidelity High Dividend ETF (subtitles read “FDV” but context indicates FDVV)
  • CGDV — Capital Group Dividend Value ETF
  • DGRO — iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF

Reference / benchmark

  • VO — Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (used as a reference point vs dividend funds; not a dividend fund)

Macro “safe income” instruments mentioned (for portfolio base)

  • Treasuries
  • Safe bonds
  • Annuities

Other

  • S&P 500 (referenced via the VO comparison)

Key numbers highlighted (yields, returns, expenses, fund size)

Fund scale and costs (from the table recap; expense ratios already deducted from returns)

  • VIG: $129.5B assets; 0.04% (4 bps) expense; track record since ~2007; established ~20 years
  • SCHD: $100.8B assets; 0.06% (6 bps) expense; established <15 years
  • VYM: $96.2B assets; 0.04% (4 bps) expense; established ~since 2006
  • DGRO: $42.2B assets; 0.08% (8 bps) expense; established since 2014
  • CGDV: $36.6B assets; 0.33% (33 bps) expense; established since 2022
  • FDVV: $10B assets; 0.15% (15 bps) expense; established Sept 12, 2016 (about a “10-year” track record at filming)

Distribution yield (Trailing 12 months) and (where stated) 30-day SEC yield

  • SCHD: about 3.3% (both 30-day SEC and TTM)
  • VIG: 1.51% (TTM yield stated)
  • VYM: 2.3% (TTM yield stated)
  • FDVV: 2.87% (TTM yield stated)
  • DGRO: 1.95% (TTM yield stated)
  • CGDV: 1.19% (TTM yield stated; described as low despite “dividend” in name)

Trailing total returns (past 3 years; annualized)

  • CGDV: 22.76% (highest stated)
  • VO (S&P 500 reference): 19.71%
  • FDVV: 19.05% (described as strong; only one in the “top-right quadrant”)
  • SCHD: 14.64% (weaker than most others except VYM per subtitles)
  • VIG: 15.33%
  • DGRO: 16.82%
  • VYM: 11.72% (lowest stated total return)

VIG dividend growth track record

  • VIG dividends per share grew at 8.15% annualized (since first full year in 2007), with minor dips in 2009 and 2013.

High/low tradeoff examples explicitly called out

  • The “perfect” outcome would be high yield + high total return, but the presenter says this tradeoff is unavoidable in practice.

Framework / methodology used (income vs growth scoring approach)

The presenter uses a 2-axis comparison chart across the six ETFs (plus VO as a benchmark):

  • X-axis: Trailing total return over last 3 years (annualized)
    • Interpreted as returns from dividends + capital gains/losses
  • Y-axis: Trailing 12-month distribution yield (TTM cash distributions / share price)

Interpretation:

  • Farther right = better total return
  • Higher up = higher income yield

“Quadrant” logic used to identify balance:

  • Top-right quadrant = relatively high yield and high total return
  • Only FDVV is described as being in that top-right quadrant.

Explicit conclusions / recommendations (and who should/shouldn’t use dividend funds)

“Personal opinion” section (positioning in a portfolio)

  • The presenter says they currently do not own dividend funds, because they are in a growth phase and plan to use S&P 500 and similar growth investments.
  • For guaranteed income, they generally prefer:
    • Annuities
    • Treasuries
    • Safe bonds
  • View on dividend funds:
    • Dividend funds are not built for lifelong guaranteed income.

When dividend funds may fit (the “boost” part of a portfolio)

If the viewer agrees with this framing, dividend funds could be appropriate if they want:

  1. An extra equity income stream with a history of growing distributions over time (not guaranteed, but generally grown for these ETFs)

  2. Inflation protection for part of income; equities/dividend-focused funds may help.

  3. More defensive equity exposure that can diversify the equity sleeve and provide a stabilizing income stream.

When to avoid dividend funds (explicit cautions)

Consider avoiding if any apply:

  1. Need lifelong guaranteed income for the base of the retirement portfolio (dividends aren’t guaranteed; annuities/treasuries/safe bonds are framed as the solution)

  2. Fear a market correction/crash and won’t add equity exposure (dividend ETFs are still equity funds)

  3. Skepticism that dividend funds matter due to the inherent income–growth tradeoff.

Key “winner” takeaways mentioned

  • Highest total return over 3 years: CGDV (22.76%)
    • Said to outperform VO (19.71%) despite low distribution yield (1.19%).
    • Presenter questions whether it functions more like an active alternative to S&P 500 rather than a classic dividend-income product.
  • Best pure yield (within the set): SCHD (~3.3%)
    • But lower total return (14.64%) and described as weaker on total returns vs most others (except VYM).
  • Best balance in the “top-right quadrant”: FDVV
    • Yield 2.87% and total return 19.05%.
  • Middle/“safe pair of hands” profile: DGRO
    • Yield 1.95%, total return 16.82% (close to chart averages).
  • “Default” defensive/growth-income compromise: VIG
    • Not outstanding on yield/total return (1.51% yield, 15.33% total return), but emphasized for dividend growth (8.15% annualized since 2007), low expense (0.04%), and largest assets.

Presenters / sources

  • Presenter: Markets with Marcus (Marcus)
  • Data source cited: Morningstar (for distribution yield calculations)
  • The video notes “according to Morningstar” for yield calculations and trailing distribution methodology.

Original video