AFMC vs IVV
First Trust Active Factor Mid Cap ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. AFMC delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | AFMC | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.68% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $205M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.70% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 266 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +19.17% | +12.96% | |
| 1Y Return | +27.23% | +20.70% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.40% | +22.10% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.59% | +13.40% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 20.4% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -42.1% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Dec 4, 2019 | May 15, 2000 |
AFMC vs IVV Performance
First Trust Active Factor Mid Cap ETF (AFMC) is a ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year AFMC returned +27.23% while IVV returned +20.70%. Year to date, AFMC is up 19.17% versus a gain of 12.96% for IVV.
Over three years, AFMC compounded at +20.40% per year against +22.10% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +11.59% and +13.40% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, AFMC has the edge at +12.42% annualized vs +7.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
AFMC has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.4% compared with 15.1% for IVV. 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 -42.1% for AFMC 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 0.88. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AFMC charges 0.68% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $68 vs $3 annually, a gap of $65 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AFMC currently yields 0.70% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
AFMC and IVV share 39 holdings out of 728 unique holdings combined, representing a 1.3% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, AFMC or IVV?
AFMC has an expense ratio of 0.68% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $65 per year of difference.
Which performed better, AFMC or IVV?
Over the past year AFMC returned +27.23% vs +20.70% for IVV, so AFMC leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), AFMC annualized +12.42% vs +7.01% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, AFMC or IVV?
AFMC has been the more volatile fund at 20.4% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: AFMC -42.1% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both AFMC and IVV?
AFMC and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.88, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between AFMC and IVV?
AFMC and IVV share 39 common holdings with a 1.3% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 728 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, AFMC or IVV?
AFMC yields 0.70% while IVV yields 1.10%, so IVV 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.