AEMV vs IVV

AEMV vs IVV

Which is better, AEMV or IVV?

Mid Cap Value against Large Cap Blend.

IVV has a lower expense ratio. AEMV is less concentrated, with 28.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%.

Lower Fees: IVVLess Concentrated: AEMV

MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.

Side-by-Side Comparison

MetricAEMVIVV
Expense Ratio0.38%0.03%Best
AUM-$876.4B
Dividend Yield0.00%1.06%
Holdings97508
YTD Return-1.39%+12.01%Best
1Y Return-+16.48%
3Y Return (annualized)-+21.21%
5Y Return (annualized)-+12.95%
Top 10 Weight28.3%Best37.8%
Fund FamilyHarbor FundsiShares by BlackRock (US)
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleMid Cap ValueLarge Cap Blend
InceptionAug 26, 2026May 15, 2000

Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.

AEMV vs IVV growth

Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.

AEMV vs IVV Performance

Harbor AlphaEdge Mid Cap Value ETF (AEMV) is an ETF from Harbor Funds and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Year to date, AEMV is down 1.39% versus a gain of 12.01% for IVV.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Fees and Cost Over Time

AEMV charges 0.38% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $38 vs $3 annually, a gap of $35 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AEMV currently yields 0.00% against 1.06% for IVV.

Holdings Overlap

AEMV already in IVV57.8%
IVV already in AEMV2.6%

57.8% of AEMV's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 2.6% of IVV's money is in holdings AEMV also owns.

The two portfolios partly overlap.

50 positions in common, counted across the 97 positions we hold weights for in AEMV and 490 in IVV, against full books of 97 and 508.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 433 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for AEMV (96.0% of the fund), and 42 for AEMV that do not appear in IVV (38.5%).

Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.

Top Shared Holdings

StockWeight in AEMVWeight in IVVDifference
MPCMarathon Petroleum Corp3.48%0.16%3.32%
AMPAmeriprise Financial Inc3.48%0.08%3.40%
HSTHost Hotels & Resorts Inc3.03%0.02%3.01%
SNASnap-On Inc.2.83%0.03%2.80%
TROWT Rowe Price Grp2.48%0.04%2.44%
PSXPhillips 662.21%0.15%2.06%
PFGPrincipalfinancialgroupinc.2.17%0.03%2.14%
NTAPNetapp Inc2.07%0.06%2.01%
HPQHp Inc.2.08%0.04%2.04%
NUENucor Corp.1.91%0.09%1.82%

57.8% of AEMV is already inside IVV.

You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.

AEMVIVV

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, AEMV or IVV?

AEMV has an expense ratio of 0.38% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $35 a year on a $10,000 investment.

What is the holdings overlap between AEMV and IVV?

57.8% of AEMV's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 2.6% of IVV's is in holdings AEMV also owns. They hold 50 positions in common, counted across the 97 positions we hold weights for in AEMV and 490 in IVV.

Which pays a higher dividend, AEMV or IVV?

AEMV yields 0.00% while IVV yields 1.06%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is IVV better than AEMV?

IVV has a lower expense ratio. AEMV is less concentrated, with 28.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.