BBAX vs IVV
JPMorgan BetaBuilders Developed Asia Pacific ex-Japan ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, BBAX or IVV?
IVV has been ahead.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 49.6%.
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 | BBAX | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.19% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $6.9B | $886.7B |
| Dividend Yield | 3.53% | 1.10% |
| Holdings | 102 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +15.17%Best | +12.70% |
| 1Y Return | +17.77% | +19.36%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +16.22% | +21.16%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.85% | +12.75%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.3% | 16.8%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -39.6% | -33.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $13,927 | $18,221Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 49.6% | 37.9%Best |
| Fund Family | J.P. Morgan Asset Management | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Aug 7, 2018 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 8, 2018 to Sep 8, 2026 (8.1 years).
BBAX 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 8.1 years both funds cover.
BBAX vs IVV Performance
JPMorgan BetaBuilders Developed Asia Pacific ex-Japan ETF (BBAX) is an ETF from J.P. Morgan Asset Management and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BBAX returned +17.77% while IVV returned +19.36%. Year to date, BBAX is up 15.17% versus a gain of 12.70% for IVV.
Over three years, BBAX compounded at +16.22% per year against +21.16% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +6.85% and +12.75% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +14.03% annualized vs +6.12%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BBAX has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.3% compared with 16.8% 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 -39.6% for BBAX and -33.9% 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 0.76. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BBAX charges 0.19% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $19 vs $3 annually, a gap of $16 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BBAX currently yields 3.53% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 91 holdings in BBAX and 504 in IVV, totalling 99.6% and 100.0% 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 91 positions we hold weights for in BBAX and 504 in IVV, against full books of 102 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 493 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for BBAX (99.2% of the fund), and 3 for BBAX that do not appear in IVV (3.7%).
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 BBAX 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, BBAX or IVV?
BBAX has an expense ratio of 0.19% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $16 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, BBAX or IVV?
Over the past year BBAX returned +17.77% vs +19.36% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), BBAX annualized +6.12% vs +14.03% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, BBAX or IVV?
BBAX has been the more volatile fund at 18.3% annualized versus 16.8% for IVV. Worst drawdown: BBAX -39.6% vs IVV -33.9%.
Should I hold both BBAX and IVV?
BBAX and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.76, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, BBAX or IVV?
BBAX yields 3.53% while IVV yields 1.10%, so BBAX currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than BBAX?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 49.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.