Computed head-to-head · 6 dimensions

RY vs WFC

Royal Bank of Canada versus Wells Fargo & Company — yield, safety, growth trend, cost, scale, and tax treatment.

RY wins 2–0 on our six-dimension comparison, but WFC can still be the better fit depending on your priorities — see each dimension below.

RY wins this comparison 2–0 across 6 dimensions. RY yields 2.38% — higher than WFC's 2.23% — and carries a 9.0/10 dividend safety score (Strong) vs 9.0/10 for WFC (Strong). RY wins 2–0 on our six-dimension comparison, but WFC can still be the better fit depending on your priorities — see each dimension below.

On yield alone, RY generates 2.38% vs 2.23% — a 0.15% difference that translates to $150 more per year on a $100,000 investment.

Scorecard at a glance

Dimension	RY	WFC	Winner
Yield	2.38%	2.23%	RY wins
Dividend safety	9.0/10	9.0/10	Tie
Growth trend	-1.16% vs 5y	+0.09% vs 5y	RY wins
Volatility (beta)	0.93	0.92	Tie
Scale	$291.1B	$270.5B	Tie
Tax efficiency	Qualified-eligible	Qualified-eligible	Tie
Overall	2 wins	0 wins	RY wins

Dimension by dimension

RY wins on yield (2.38% vs 2.23%)

On a $10,000 investment that's about $15 more in annual dividend income before taxes — though higher yield often comes with higher risk.

RY's higher yield (2.38%) looks attractive but investors should weigh whether the extra income compensates for any additional risk versus WFC's 2.23% — especially if the higher yield is driven by covered calls or a falling share price.

RY: 2.38%WFC: 2.23%

Safety scores are too close to call (9.0/10 vs 9.0/10)

Both score within 0.3 points on our 0-10 dividend safety scale — comparable risk profiles on the signals we measure.

RY: 9.0/10WFC: 9.0/10

RY shows healthier dividend-vs-price trend

RY's yield is 1.16% below its 5y average, versus 0.09% for WFC. Lower (or below-average) yield trend often means price appreciation outpaced distributions — a healthier signal.

RY: -1.16% vs 5yWFC: +0.09% vs 5y

Volatility (beta) is similar

Both tickers move with comparable sensitivity to the broader market.

RY: 0.93WFC: 0.92

Comparable scale ($291.1B vs $270.5B)

Within 1.5x of each other on market cap / AUM — similar institutional footprint.

RY: $291.1BWFC: $270.5B

Both pay qualified-dividend-eligible distributions

Neither is structurally flagged for ordinary-income tax treatment. Most distributions should qualify for the lower long-term capital gains rate if holding-period requirements are met.

RY: Qualified-eligibleWFC: Qualified-eligible

How we compare these

Every comparison on this page is computed from current public data, not written by hand. Yield comes from the most recent dividend distribution annualized over current price. Safety scores combine yield zone, payout ratio, trend vs 5-year average, instrument type, and size — see our methodology for the exact formula. Tax-efficiency flags identify covered-call ETFs, REITs, and mREITs which distribute primarily as ordinary income.

This is educational, not investment advice.Scores reflect a snapshot of public data on the "as of" dates shown on each ticker's safety page. Verify on the issuer's investor relations page or your brokerage before making decisions.

Frequently asked

Which is better for income, RY or WFC?

RY wins 2–0 on our six-dimension comparison, but WFC can still be the better fit depending on your priorities — see each dimension below.

RY vs WFC: which has a higher dividend yield?

RY yields 2.38% and WFC yields 2.23%. On a $10,000 investment that's about $15 more in annual dividend income before taxes — though higher yield often comes with higher risk.

Is RY or WFC a safer dividend in 2026?

RY scores 9.0/10 (Strong) on the Infnits dividend safety scale. WFC scores 9.0/10 (Strong). Both have comparable safety scores.

Which has better dividend growth, RY or WFC?