BETZ vs IVV
Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming 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 | BETZ | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.75% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $50M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 5.01% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 27 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | -6.43% | +12.76% | |
| 1Y Return | -18.14% | +20.14% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +5.89% | +21.69% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -7.68% | +13.00% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 28.7% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -60.8% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Roundhill Investments | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Dec 31, 2023 | May 15, 2000 |
BETZ vs IVV Performance
Roundhill Sports Betting & iGaming ETF (BETZ) is a ETF from Roundhill Investments and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BETZ returned -18.14% while IVV returned +20.14%. Year to date, BETZ is down 6.43% versus a gain of 12.76% for IVV.
Over three years, BETZ compounded at +5.89% per year against +21.69% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are -7.68% and +13.00% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +6.99% annualized vs +4.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BETZ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 28.7% 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 -60.8% for BETZ 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 0.68. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BETZ charges 0.75% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $75 vs $3 annually, a gap of $72 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BETZ currently yields 5.01% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
BETZ and IVV share 0 holdings out of 529 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, BETZ or IVV?
BETZ has an expense ratio of 0.75% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $72 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BETZ or IVV?
Over the past year BETZ returned -18.14% vs +20.14% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), BETZ annualized +4.03% vs +6.99% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BETZ or IVV?
BETZ has been the more volatile fund at 28.7% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: BETZ -60.8% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both BETZ and IVV?
BETZ and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.68, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BETZ and IVV?
BETZ and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 529 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BETZ or IVV?
BETZ yields 5.01% while IVV yields 1.10%, so BETZ 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.