BCKT vs IVV
LifeX 2030 Income Bucket ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, BCKT or IVV?
IVV has been ahead.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y.
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 | BCKT | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.25% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $2M | $876.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 22.76% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 38 | 508 |
| YTD Return | -9.45% | +12.39%Best |
| 1Y Return | -8.47% | +16.61%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +21.38% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +13.51% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 4.2%Best | 13.3% |
| Fund Family | Stone Ridge Asset Management | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity |
| Style | - | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Sep 24, 2025 | May 15, 2000 |
Not shown on this pair: Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window, Top 10 Weight.
BCKT 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
BCKT vs IVV Performance
LifeX 2030 Income Bucket ETF (BCKT) is an ETF from Stone Ridge Asset Management and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BCKT returned -8.47% while IVV returned +16.61%. Year to date, BCKT is down 9.45% versus a gain of 12.39% 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 13.3% compared with 4.2% for BCKT. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.08. They move largely independently of each other.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BCKT charges 0.25% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $25 vs $3 annually, a gap of $22 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BCKT currently yields 22.76% against 1.06% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 23 holdings in BCKT and 490 in IVV, totalling 65.1% 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 23 positions we hold weights for in BCKT and 490 in IVV, against full books of 38 and 508.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of BCKT 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, BCKT or IVV?
BCKT has an expense ratio of 0.25% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $22 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, BCKT or IVV?
Over the past year BCKT returned -8.47% 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, BCKT or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 13.3% annualized versus 4.2% for BCKT.
Should I hold both BCKT and IVV?
BCKT and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.08, 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, BCKT or IVV?
BCKT yields 22.76% while IVV yields 1.06%, so BCKT currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than BCKT?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.