VIG vs NOBL: Choosing Between Dividend Growth and Dividend Stability

Performance tells the first story

When evaluating dividend-focused ETFs, the numbers speak clearly. Over the trailing 12 months (as of December 2025), VIG delivered 12.73% in total returns, substantially outpacing NOBL’s 3.05%. However, this performance advantage comes with a caveat—VIG experienced a larger maximum drawdown of -20.39% over five years, compared to NOBL’s -17.92%.

An initial $1,000 investment made five years ago would have grown to $1,559 in VIG versus $1,316 in NOBL, reflecting the cumulative benefit of VIG’s broader exposure and lower drag from fees. Yet the volatility differences matter for investors who prioritize stability over raw returns.

The cost structure creates a stark divide

One of the most dramatic differences between these funds lies in their expense ratios. VIG charges just 0.05% annually, while NOBL costs 0.35%—a seven-fold difference in annual fees. Over decades of investing, this seemingly small gap compounds significantly.

VIG’s cost advantage is matched by its scale: the fund commands $120.4 billion in assets under management, dwarfing NOBL’s $11.3 billion. This size advantage typically translates to better liquidity and execution efficiency.

NOBL compensates somewhat through dividend yield. Its 2.04% yield exceeds VIG’s 1.59%, offering a modest income advantage for those prioritizing current cash flow over capital appreciation.

Inside the portfolios: Growth vs. Defensive posture

VIG takes a broad approach, holding 338 U.S. large-cap stocks with consistent dividend growth histories spanning nearly 20 years. Technology dominates the allocation at 28%, followed by financial services (22%) and healthcare (15%). Top holdings include Broadcom, Microsoft, and Apple—names that combine dividend payments with significant capital appreciation potential. This tilt toward growth reflects VIG’s focus on dividend growth rather than current yield.

NOBL operates with a tighter lens, maintaining 70 stocks selected from companies that qualify as dividend aristocrats—S&P 500 constituents having raised dividends for at least 25 consecutive years. The portfolio emphasizes industrials (23%) and consumer defensive stocks (22%), with leading positions in Albemarle, Expeditors International Washington, and C.H. Robinson Worldwide.

Equal weighting and sector caps further distinguish NOBL. Rather than letting large companies dominate the portfolio, NOBL deliberately constrains any single sector’s influence, preventing concentration risk. This structural choice intentionally limits exposure to technology’s explosive growth, keeping the fund grounded in established, mature businesses.

Volatility metrics and downside behavior

Both funds exhibit similar beta values—NOBL at 0.77 and VIG at 0.79—indicating both move with roughly 77-79% of the S&P 500’s volatility. This suggests both funds offer modest protection during market downturns, though VIG’s slightly lower beta doesn’t offset its larger drawdown experience.

The real differentiation emerges during market rallies. VIG’s growth orientation means it captures upside more forcefully. NOBL’s defensive weighting and concentrated dividend aristocrat focus can lag during strong equity advances, as proven by the 12-month performance gap.

Understanding dividend vs. growth trade-offs

The fundamental choice boils down to your investment objective. VIG prioritizes dividend growth, selecting companies expected to increase payouts over time. The lower expense ratio (0.05% vs 0.35%) amplifies long-term wealth accumulation, allowing the power of compounding to work unimpeded.

NOBL prioritizes dividend stability, seeking established payers with ironclad track records. The equal-weighting structure and sector caps intentionally reduce concentration and limit momentum-driven gains. This approach appeals to those seeking predictable income and smoother drawdown experiences.

For growth-oriented dividend investors comfortable with market-level volatility, VIG’s combination of lower costs, broader diversification, and proven long-term performance creates a compelling case. The fund functions best as a core holding for those whose dividend strategy emphasizes reinvestment and compounding.

For conservative investors or those already holding growth exposure elsewhere, NOBL’s defensive character and focus on unchanging payers offers portfolio balance. The higher dividend yield and deliberate sector constraints may underperform during equity rallies but provide psychological comfort and actual downside mitigation when markets turn uncertain.

Making the final decision

Neither fund is objectively “better”—each excels in different contexts. The choice between dividend growth (VIG’s strength) and dividend stability (NOBL’s approach) determines which fits your portfolio architecture. Consider whether you’re building wealth through reinvestment or generating current income, whether you already hold growth exposure elsewhere, and whether you prioritize long-term outperformance or cycle-to-cycle volatility reduction.

Both funds maintain lower volatility than the broader market and offer genuine diversification within the dividend theme—a meaningful starting point for either strategy.