BBH vs IVV
VanEck Biotech ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. BBH delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BBH | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.35% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $406M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.46% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 26 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +14.62% | +14.29% | |
| 1Y Return | +32.77% | +21.79% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +10.99% | +22.19% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +1.31% | +13.28% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 31.0% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -72.7% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | VanEck | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Dec 20, 2011 | May 15, 2000 |
BBH vs IVV Performance
VanEck Biotech ETF (BBH) is a ETF from VanEck and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BBH returned +32.77% while IVV returned +21.79%. Year to date, BBH is up 14.62% versus a gain of 14.29% for IVV.
Over three years, BBH compounded at +10.99% per year against +22.19% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +1.31% and +13.28% respectively. Across the full 26-year window we track, BBH has the edge at +14.28% annualized vs +7.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BBH has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 31.0% 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 -72.7% for BBH 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 0.50. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BBH 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, BBH currently yields 0.46% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
BBH and IVV share 10 holdings out of 519 unique holdings combined, representing a 1.1% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BBH or IVV?
BBH 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, BBH or IVV?
Over the past year BBH returned +32.77% vs +21.79% for IVV, so BBH leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (26 years), BBH annualized +14.28% vs +7.06% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BBH or IVV?
BBH has been the more volatile fund at 31.0% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: BBH -72.7% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both BBH and IVV?
BBH and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.50, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BBH and IVV?
BBH and IVV share 10 common holdings with a 1.1% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 519 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BBH or IVV?
BBH yields 0.46% 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.