BFOR vs IVV
Barron'S 400 ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. BFOR delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BFOR | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.65% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $233M | $865.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.68% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 401 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +18.08% | +13.72% | |
| 1Y Return | +24.14% | +21.64% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +19.25% | +21.55% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.11% | +13.27% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.6% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -42.2% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | ALPS ETF Trust | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Jun 3, 2013 | May 15, 2000 |
BFOR vs IVV Performance
Barron'S 400 ETF (BFOR) is a ETF from ALPS ETF Trust and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BFOR returned +24.14% while IVV returned +21.64%. Year to date, BFOR is up 18.08% versus a gain of 13.72% for IVV.
Over three years, BFOR compounded at +19.25% per year against +21.55% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +11.11% and +13.27% respectively. Across the full 13-year window we track, BFOR has the edge at +11.37% annualized vs +7.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BFOR has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.6% 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 -42.2% for BFOR 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 0.89. 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 0.68% against 1.09% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
BFOR and IVV share 133 holdings out of 755 unique holdings combined, representing a 16.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
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. On a $10,000 investment, that is $62 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BFOR or IVV?
Over the past year BFOR returned +24.14% vs +21.64% for IVV, so BFOR leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (13 years), BFOR annualized +11.37% vs +7.04% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BFOR or IVV?
BFOR has been the more volatile fund at 17.6% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: BFOR -42.2% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both BFOR and IVV?
BFOR and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.89, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BFOR and IVV?
BFOR and IVV share 133 common holdings with a 16.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 755 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BFOR or IVV?
BFOR yields 0.68% while IVV yields 1.09%, so IVV 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.