CDC vs IVV
VictoryShares US EQ Income Enhanced Volatility Wtd ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, CDC or IVV?
Large Cap Value against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. CDC led over 1Y, IVV over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. CDC is less concentrated, with 14.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CDC | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.35% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $738M | $876.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 3.05% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 102 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +15.00%Best | +12.27% |
| 1Y Return | +17.28%Best | +17.04% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +13.82% | +21.24%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.41% | +13.08%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.4%Best | 14.8% |
| Max Drawdown | -21.4%Best | -33.9% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $13,643 | $18,490Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 14.8%Best | 37.8% |
| Fund Family | Victory Capital Management Inc. | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Value | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jul 1, 2014 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 2, 2014 to Sep 17, 2026 (12.2 years).
CDC vs IVV growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 12.2 years both funds cover.
CDC vs IVV Performance
VictoryShares US EQ Income Enhanced Volatility Wtd ETF (CDC) is an ETF from Victory Capital Management Inc. and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year CDC returned +17.28% while IVV returned +17.04%. Year to date, CDC is up 15.00% versus a gain of 12.27% for IVV.
Over three years, CDC compounded at +13.82% per year against +21.24% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +6.41% and +13.08% respectively. Across the full 12-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +12.40% annualized vs +8.14%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.8% compared with 12.4% for CDC. 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 CDC and -33.9% for IVV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.74. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CDC charges 0.35% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $35 vs $3 annually, a gap of $32 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CDC currently yields 3.05% against 1.06% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
89.7% of CDC's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 13.2% of IVV's money is in holdings CDC also owns.
Most of CDC is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
86 positions in common, counted across the 101 positions we hold weights for in CDC and 490 in IVV, against full books of 102 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 397 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for CDC (85.4% of the fund), and 14 for CDC that do not appear in IVV (9.3%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in CDC | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| XOMExxon Mobil Corp. | 1.12% | 1.01% | 0.11% |
| KOCoca Cola Co. | 1.58% | 0.52% | 1.06% |
| CVXChevron Corp | 1.28% | 0.58% | 0.70% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 1.06% | 0.68% | 0.38% |
| PGProcter & Gamble Company | 1.20% | 0.51% | 0.69% |
| DUKDuke Energy Corp | 1.53% | 0.14% | 1.39% |
| ADPAutomatic Data Processing, Inc. | 1.46% | 0.17% | 1.29% |
| EVRGEvergy Inc. | 1.54% | 0.03% | 1.51% |
| FEFirstenergy Corp. | 1.53% | 0.04% | 1.49% |
| MRKMerck & Company Inc | 1.02% | 0.55% | 0.47% |
89.7% of CDC is already inside IVV.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CDC or IVV?
CDC has an expense ratio of 0.35% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $32 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CDC or IVV?
Over the past year CDC returned +17.28% vs +17.04% for IVV, so CDC leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (12 years), CDC annualized +8.14% vs +12.40% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CDC or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 14.8% annualized versus 12.4% for CDC. Worst drawdown: CDC -21.4% vs IVV -33.9%.
Should I hold both CDC and IVV?
CDC and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.74, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between CDC and IVV?
89.7% of CDC's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 13.2% of IVV's is in holdings CDC also owns. They hold 86 positions in common, counted across the 101 positions we hold weights for in CDC and 490 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, CDC or IVV?
CDC yields 3.05% while IVV yields 1.06%, so CDC currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than CDC?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. CDC led over 1Y, IVV over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. CDC is less concentrated, with 14.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.