BTT vs IVV
BlackRock Municipal 2030 Target Term Trust vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. BTT offers more diversification with 557 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | BTT | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.34% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $1.6B | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 2.28% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 557 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +0.57% | +12.96% | |
| 1Y Return | +4.38% | +20.70% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +6.17% | +22.10% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -0.36% | +13.40% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 10.2% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -35.0% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | BlackRock, Inc. (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Tax Preferred | Equity | |
| Inception | Aug 29, 2012 | May 15, 2000 |
BTT vs IVV Performance
BlackRock Municipal 2030 Target Term Trust (BTT) is a ETF from BlackRock, Inc. (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year BTT returned +4.38% while IVV returned +20.70%. Year to date, BTT is up 0.57% versus a gain of 12.96% for IVV.
Over three years, BTT compounded at +6.17% per year against +22.10% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are -0.36% and +13.40% respectively. Across the full 14-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.01% annualized vs +0.41%. 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 10.2% for BTT. 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 -35.0% for BTT 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 0.37. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
BTT charges 1.34% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $134 vs $3 annually, a gap of $131 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, BTT currently yields 2.28% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
BTT and IVV share 0 holdings out of 630 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, BTT or IVV?
BTT has an expense ratio of 1.34% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $131 per year of difference.
Which performed better, BTT or IVV?
Over the past year BTT returned +4.38% vs +20.70% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (14 years), BTT annualized +0.41% vs +7.01% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, BTT or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 10.2% for BTT. Worst drawdown: BTT -35.0% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both BTT and IVV?
BTT and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.37, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between BTT and IVV?
BTT and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 630 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, BTT or IVV?
BTT yields 2.28% while IVV yields 1.10%, so BTT 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.