AGRW vs IVV
Allspring LT Large Growth 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 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | AGRW | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.35% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $117M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.12% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 51 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +7.78% | +12.71% | |
| 1Y Return | +13.17% | +21.89% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +22.08% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.96% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.1% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -16.5% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Allspring Global Investments | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Mar 26, 2025 | May 15, 2000 |
AGRW vs IVV Performance
Allspring LT Large Growth ETF (AGRW) is a ETF from Allspring Global Investments and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year AGRW returned +13.17% while IVV returned +21.89%. Year to date, AGRW is up 7.78% versus a gain of 12.71% for IVV.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
AGRW has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.1% 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 -16.5% for AGRW 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 0.94. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
AGRW charges 0.35% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $35 vs $3 annually, a gap of $32 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, AGRW currently yields 0.12% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
AGRW and IVV share 37 holdings out of 517 unique holdings combined, representing a 37.5% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, AGRW or IVV?
AGRW has an expense ratio of 0.35% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $32 per year of difference.
Which performed better, AGRW or IVV?
Over the past year AGRW returned +13.17% vs +21.89% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (1 years), AGRW annualized +22.06% vs +7.00% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, AGRW or IVV?
AGRW has been the more volatile fund at 17.1% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: AGRW -16.5% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both AGRW and IVV?
AGRW and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between AGRW and IVV?
AGRW and IVV share 37 common holdings with a 37.5% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 517 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, AGRW or IVV?
AGRW yields 0.12% 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.