BFOR vs IVV
Barron'S 400 ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, BFOR or IVV?
Mid Cap Blend against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. BFOR is less concentrated, with 5.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.9%.
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 | BFOR | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.65% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $237M | $886.7B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.52% | 1.10% |
| Holdings | 396 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +16.40%Best | +13.39% |
| 1Y Return | +19.76% | +20.08%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +19.18% | +21.29%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +10.85% | +12.88%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.5% | 14.5%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -42.2% | -33.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $16,737 | $18,327Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 5.1%Best | 37.9% |
| Fund Family | ALPS ETF Trust | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jun 3, 2013 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 4, 2013 to Sep 4, 2026 (13.3 years).
BFOR 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 covers the 13.3 years both funds cover.
BFOR vs IVV Performance
Barron'S 400 ETF (BFOR) is an ETF from ALPS ETF Trust and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BFOR returned +19.76% while IVV returned +20.08%. Year to date, BFOR is up 16.40% versus a gain of 13.39% for IVV.
Over three years, BFOR compounded at +19.18% per year against +21.29% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +10.85% and +12.88% respectively. Across the full 13-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +13.05% annualized vs +11.19%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BFOR has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.5% compared with 14.5% 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 -42.2% for BFOR and -33.9% for IVV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.89. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BFOR charges 0.65% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $65 vs $3 annually, a gap of $62 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BFOR currently yields 0.52% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
32.8% of BFOR's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 47.3% of IVV's money is in holdings BFOR also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
131 positions in common, counted across the 378 positions we hold weights for in BFOR and 505 in IVV, against full books of 396 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 366 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for BFOR (52.0% of the fund), and 234 for BFOR that do not appear in IVV (59.3%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in BFOR | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp. | 0.27% | 7.98% | 7.71% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 0.26% | 6.86% | 6.60% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp 4.100 Feb 06 37 | 0.27% | 5.44% | 5.17% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc.Class A | 0.24% | 3.19% | 2.95% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 0.26% | 2.98% | 2.72% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 0.48% | 1.51% | 1.03% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 0.25% | 1.39% | 1.14% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 0.25% | 0.92% | 0.67% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 0.23% | 0.93% | 0.70% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 0.32% | 0.64% | 0.32% |
47.3% of IVV is already inside BFOR.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BFOR or IVV?
BFOR has an expense ratio of 0.65% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $62 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, BFOR or IVV?
Over the past year BFOR returned +19.76% vs +20.08% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (13 years), BFOR annualized +11.19% vs +13.05% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, BFOR or IVV?
BFOR has been the more volatile fund at 17.5% annualized versus 14.5% for IVV. Worst drawdown: BFOR -42.2% vs IVV -33.9%.
Should I hold both BFOR and IVV?
BFOR and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.89, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between BFOR and IVV?
47.3% of IVV's money is in holdings BFOR also owns. 47.3% of IVV's is in holdings BFOR also owns. They hold 131 positions in common, counted across the 378 positions we hold weights for in BFOR and 505 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, BFOR or IVV?
BFOR yields 0.52% while IVV yields 1.10%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than BFOR?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. BFOR is less concentrated, with 5.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.