BMAR vs IVV
Innovator US Equity Buffer ETF - March 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 | BMAR | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.79% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $251M | $865.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 6 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +10.80% | +13.43% | |
| 1Y Return | +17.66% | +22.61% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +16.41% | +21.47% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.00% | +13.26% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 10.0% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -21.4% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Innovator ETFs Trust | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Alternative | Equity | |
| Inception | Feb 28, 2020 | May 15, 2000 |
BMAR vs IVV Performance
Innovator US Equity Buffer ETF - March (BMAR) is a ETF from Innovator ETFs Trust and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BMAR returned +17.66% while IVV returned +22.61%. Year to date, BMAR is up 10.80% versus a gain of 13.43% for IVV.
Over three years, BMAR compounded at +16.41% per year against +21.47% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +12.00% and +13.26% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, BMAR has the edge at +13.02% annualized vs +7.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 10.0% for BMAR. 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 -21.4% for BMAR 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 0.96. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BMAR charges 0.79% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $79 vs $3 annually, a gap of $76 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BMAR currently yields 0.00% against 1.09% for IVV.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BMAR or IVV?
BMAR has an expense ratio of 0.79% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $76 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BMAR or IVV?
Over the past year BMAR returned +17.66% vs +22.61% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), BMAR annualized +13.02% vs +7.03% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BMAR or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 10.0% for BMAR. Worst drawdown: BMAR -21.4% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both BMAR and IVV?
BMAR and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.96, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
Which pays a higher dividend, BMAR or IVV?
BMAR yields 0.00% 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.