BCDF vs IVV
Horizon Kinetics Blockchain Development 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 | BCDF | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.85% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $24M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 2.37% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 39 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +12.46% | +13.25% | |
| 1Y Return | +12.34% | +19.95% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +17.90% | +21.26% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.82% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.3% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -27.7% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Horizon Kinetics LLC | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Aug 1, 2022 | May 15, 2000 |
BCDF vs IVV Performance
Horizon Kinetics Blockchain Development ETF (BCDF) is a ETF from Horizon Kinetics LLC and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BCDF returned +12.34% while IVV returned +19.95%. Year to date, BCDF is up 12.46% versus a gain of 13.25% for IVV.
Over three years, BCDF compounded at +17.90% per year against +21.26% for IVV. Across the full 4-year window we track, BCDF has the edge at +8.65% annualized vs +7.01%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BCDF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.3% 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 -27.7% for BCDF 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 0.69. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BCDF charges 0.85% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $85 vs $3 annually, a gap of $82 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BCDF currently yields 2.37% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
BCDF and IVV share 5 holdings out of 533 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.4% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BCDF or IVV?
BCDF has an expense ratio of 0.85% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $82 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BCDF or IVV?
Over the past year BCDF returned +12.34% vs +19.95% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), BCDF annualized +8.65% vs +7.01% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BCDF or IVV?
BCDF has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: BCDF -27.7% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both BCDF and IVV?
BCDF and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.69, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BCDF and IVV?
BCDF and IVV share 5 common holdings with a 0.4% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 533 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BCDF or IVV?
BCDF yields 2.37% while IVV yields 1.10%, so BCDF 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.