BSCZ vs IVV
Invesco BulletShares 2035 Corporate Bond 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 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BSCZ | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.10% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $278M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 4.62% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 315 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | -0.77% | +12.28% | |
| 1Y Return | +2.09% | +20.94% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +21.81% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +13.05% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 3.7% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -3.3% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Jun 11, 2025 | May 15, 2000 |
BSCZ vs IVV Performance
Invesco BulletShares 2035 Corporate Bond ETF (BSCZ) is a ETF from Invesco (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BSCZ returned +2.09% while IVV returned +20.94%. Year to date, BSCZ is down 0.77% versus a gain of 12.28% for IVV.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 3.7% for BSCZ. 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 -3.3% for BSCZ 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 0.39. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BSCZ charges 0.10% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $10 vs $3 annually, a gap of $7 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BSCZ currently yields 4.62% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
BSCZ and IVV share 0 holdings out of 766 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BSCZ or IVV?
BSCZ has an expense ratio of 0.10% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $7 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BSCZ or IVV?
Over the past year BSCZ returned +2.09% vs +20.94% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (1 years), BSCZ annualized +3.98% vs +6.98% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BSCZ or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 3.7% for BSCZ. Worst drawdown: BSCZ -3.3% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both BSCZ and IVV?
BSCZ and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.39, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BSCZ and IVV?
BSCZ and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 766 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BSCZ or IVV?
BSCZ yields 4.62% while IVV yields 1.10%, so BSCZ 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.