BCIM vs IVV
abrdn Bloomberg Industrial Metals Strategy K-1 Free 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 | BCIM | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.40% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $26M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 10.36% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 27 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +7.79% | +12.96% | |
| 1Y Return | +2.99% | +20.70% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | -0.31% | +22.10% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +13.40% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 20.4% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -43.4% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Aberdeen | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Alternative | Equity | |
| Inception | Sep 21, 2021 | May 15, 2000 |
BCIM vs IVV Performance
abrdn Bloomberg Industrial Metals Strategy K-1 Free ETF (BCIM) is a ETF from Aberdeen and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BCIM returned +2.99% while IVV returned +20.70%. Year to date, BCIM is up 7.79% versus a gain of 12.96% for IVV.
Over three years, BCIM compounded at -0.31% per year against +22.10% for IVV. Across the full 4-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.01% annualized vs +0.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BCIM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.4% 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 -43.4% for BCIM 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 0.36. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BCIM charges 0.40% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $40 vs $3 annually, a gap of $37 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BCIM currently yields 10.36% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
BCIM and IVV share 0 holdings out of 518 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BCIM or IVV?
BCIM has an expense ratio of 0.40% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $37 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BCIM or IVV?
Over the past year BCIM returned +2.99% vs +20.70% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), BCIM annualized +0.07% vs +7.01% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BCIM or IVV?
BCIM has been the more volatile fund at 20.4% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: BCIM -43.4% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both BCIM and IVV?
BCIM and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.36, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BCIM and IVV?
BCIM and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 518 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BCIM or IVV?
BCIM yields 10.36% while IVV yields 1.10%, so BCIM 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.