BAMA vs IVV
Brookstone Active ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, BAMA or IVV?
Nearly the same fund. IVV costs less.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.99.
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
| Metric | BAMA | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.99% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $49M | $876.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.42% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 8 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +7.66% | +12.39%Best |
| 1Y Return | +10.51% | +16.61%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +14.88% | +21.38%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +13.51% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 8.9%Best | 12.5% |
| Max Drawdown | -12.3%Best | -18.8% |
| $10,000 over 3 years | $15,161 | $18,577Best |
| Top 10 Weight | - | 37.8% |
| Fund Family | Brookstone Asset Management | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Sep 28, 2023 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 28, 2023 to Sep 18, 2026 (3 years).
BAMA 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 covers the 3 years both funds cover.
BAMA vs IVV Performance
Brookstone Active ETF (BAMA) is an ETF from Brookstone Asset Management and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BAMA returned +10.51% while IVV returned +16.61%. Year to date, BAMA is up 7.66% versus a gain of 12.39% for IVV.
Over three years, BAMA compounded at +14.88% per year against +21.38% for IVV.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 12.5% compared with 8.9% for BAMA. 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 -12.3% for BAMA and -18.8% for IVV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.99. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BAMA charges 0.99% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $99 vs $3 annually, a gap of $96 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BAMA currently yields 1.42% against 1.06% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 6 holdings in BAMA and 490 in IVV, totalling 98.9% and 99.3% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 6 positions we hold weights for in BAMA and 490 in IVV, against full books of 8 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 482 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for BAMA (98.6% of the fund), and 6 for BAMA that do not appear in IVV (98.9%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of BAMA and IVV you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BAMA or IVV?
BAMA has an expense ratio of 0.99% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $96 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, BAMA or IVV?
Over the past year BAMA returned +10.51% vs +16.61% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, BAMA or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 12.5% annualized versus 8.9% for BAMA. Worst drawdown: BAMA -12.3% vs IVV -18.8%.
Should I hold both BAMA and IVV?
BAMA and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.99, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, BAMA or IVV?
BAMA yields 1.42% while IVV yields 1.06%, so BAMA currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than BAMA?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.99. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.