BKMC vs IVV
BNY Mellon US Mid Cap Core Equity 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 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BKMC | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.04% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $655M | $865.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.45% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 403 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | -61.89% | +13.72% | |
| 1Y Return | -59.62% | +21.64% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | -19.87% | +21.55% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -13.23% | +13.27% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 32.3% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -67.7% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | BNY Mellon Investment Management | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Apr 7, 2020 | May 15, 2000 |
BKMC vs IVV Performance
BNY Mellon US Mid Cap Core Equity ETF (BKMC) is a ETF from BNY Mellon Investment Management and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BKMC returned -59.62% while IVV returned +21.64%. Year to date, BKMC is down 61.89% versus a gain of 13.72% for IVV.
Over three years, BKMC compounded at -19.87% per year against +21.55% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are -13.23% and +13.27% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.04% annualized vs -2.65%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
BKMC has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 32.3% 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 -67.7% for BKMC 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 0.51. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BKMC charges 0.04% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $4 vs $3 annually, a gap of $1 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BKMC currently yields 0.45% against 1.09% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
BKMC and IVV share 71 holdings out of 835 unique holdings combined, representing a 1.5% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BKMC or IVV?
BKMC has an expense ratio of 0.04% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $1 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BKMC or IVV?
Over the past year BKMC returned -59.62% vs +21.64% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), BKMC annualized -2.65% vs +7.04% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BKMC or IVV?
BKMC has been the more volatile fund at 32.3% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: BKMC -67.7% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both BKMC and IVV?
BKMC and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.51, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BKMC and IVV?
BKMC and IVV share 71 common holdings with a 1.5% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 835 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BKMC or IVV?
BKMC yields 0.45% 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.