BSMC vs IVV
Brandes US Small-Mid Cap Value ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. BSMC delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BSMC | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.71% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $176M | $886.7B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.90% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 73 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +16.28% | +12.92% | |
| 1Y Return | +22.50% | +21.22% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +17.93% | +20.95% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.76% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.3% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -19.1% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Brandes Investment Partners | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Oct 3, 2023 | May 15, 2000 |
BSMC vs IVV Performance
Brandes US Small-Mid Cap Value ETF (BSMC) is a ETF from Brandes Investment Partners and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BSMC returned +22.50% while IVV returned +21.22%. Year to date, BSMC is up 16.28% versus a gain of 12.92% for IVV.
Over three years, BSMC compounded at +17.93% per year against +20.95% for IVV. Across the full 3-year window we track, BSMC has the edge at +17.93% annualized vs +7.00%. 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 13.3% for BSMC. 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 -19.1% for BSMC 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 0.62. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BSMC charges 0.71% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $71 vs $3 annually, a gap of $68 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BSMC currently yields 0.90% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
BSMC and IVV share 15 holdings out of 559 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.4% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, BSMC or IVV?
BSMC has an expense ratio of 0.71% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $68 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BSMC or IVV?
Over the past year BSMC returned +22.50% vs +21.22% for IVV, so BSMC leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (3 years), BSMC annualized +17.93% vs +7.00% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BSMC or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 13.3% for BSMC. Worst drawdown: BSMC -19.1% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both BSMC and IVV?
BSMC and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.62, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BSMC and IVV?
BSMC and IVV share 15 common holdings with a 0.4% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 559 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BSMC or IVV?
BSMC yields 0.90% while IVV yields 1.10%, 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.