ACWV vs IVV
iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | ACWV | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.20% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $3.3B | $865.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.96% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 437 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +6.36% | +13.72% | |
| 1Y Return | +7.56% | +21.64% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +10.91% | +21.55% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +5.75% | +13.27% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 10.0% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -28.8% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Oct 18, 2011 | May 15, 2000 |
ACWV vs IVV Performance
iShares MSCI Global Min Vol Factor ETF (ACWV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year ACWV returned +7.56% while IVV returned +21.64%. Year to date, ACWV is up 6.36% versus a gain of 13.72% for IVV.
Over three years, ACWV compounded at +10.91% per year against +21.55% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +5.75% and +13.27% respectively. Across the full 15-year window we track, ACWV has the edge at +8.48% annualized vs +7.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 10.0% for ACWV. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -28.8% for ACWV and -56.5% for IVV. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.80. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ACWV charges 0.20% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $20 vs $3 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ACWV currently yields 1.96% against 1.09% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
ACWV and IVV share 143 holdings out of 743 unique holdings combined, representing a 22.6% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ACWV or IVV?
ACWV has an expense ratio of 0.20% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $17 per year of difference.
Which performed better, ACWV or IVV?
Over the past year ACWV returned +7.56% vs +21.64% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (15 years), ACWV annualized +8.48% vs +7.04% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, ACWV or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 10.0% for ACWV. Worst drawdown: ACWV -28.8% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both ACWV and IVV?
ACWV and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.80, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between ACWV and IVV?
ACWV and IVV share 143 common holdings with a 22.6% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 743 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, ACWV or IVV?
ACWV yields 1.96% while IVV yields 1.09%, so ACWV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.