BRW vs IVV
Saba Capital Income & Opportunities Fund vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. BRW offers more diversification with 1,064 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BRW | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.43% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $366M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 13.86% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 1,064 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +1.25% | +13.22% | |
| 1Y Return | -10.39% | +21.62% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +8.75% | +22.17% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.87% | +13.42% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.0% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -75.3% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Saba Capital | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | May 12, 1988 | May 15, 2000 |
BRW vs IVV Performance
Saba Capital Income & Opportunities Fund (BRW) is a ETF from Saba Capital and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BRW returned -10.39% while IVV returned +21.62%. Year to date, BRW is up 1.25% versus a gain of 13.22% for IVV.
Over three years, BRW compounded at +8.75% per year against +22.17% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +6.87% and +13.42% respectively. Across the full 26-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.02% annualized vs -1.13%. 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 14.0% for BRW. 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 -75.3% for BRW 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 0.53. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BRW charges 1.43% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $143 vs $3 annually, a gap of $140 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BRW currently yields 13.86% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
BRW and IVV share 99 holdings out of 938 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.1% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BRW or IVV?
BRW has an expense ratio of 1.43% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $140 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BRW or IVV?
Over the past year BRW returned -10.39% vs +21.62% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (26 years), BRW annualized -1.13% vs +7.02% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BRW or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 14.0% for BRW. Worst drawdown: BRW -75.3% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both BRW and IVV?
BRW and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.53, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BRW and IVV?
BRW and IVV share 99 common holdings with a 0.1% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 938 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BRW or IVV?
BRW yields 13.86% while IVV yields 1.10%, so BRW 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.