CGMU vs IVV
Capital Group Municipal Income ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. CGMU offers more diversification with 1,810 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CGMU | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.27% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $6.6B | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 3.38% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 1,810 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +0.82% | +12.71% | |
| 1Y Return | +4.56% | +21.89% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +4.50% | +22.08% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.96% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 5.0% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -4.1% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Capital Group (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Oct 25, 2022 | May 15, 2000 |
CGMU vs IVV Performance
Capital Group Municipal Income ETF (CGMU) is a ETF from Capital Group (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year CGMU returned +4.56% while IVV returned +21.89%. Year to date, CGMU is up 0.82% versus a gain of 12.71% for IVV.
Over three years, CGMU compounded at +4.50% per year against +22.08% for IVV. Across the full 4-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.00% annualized vs +5.25%. 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 5.0% for CGMU. 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 -4.1% for CGMU 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 0.68. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CGMU charges 0.27% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $27 vs $3 annually, a gap of $24 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CGMU currently yields 3.38% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
CGMU and IVV share 0 holdings out of 903 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, CGMU or IVV?
CGMU has an expense ratio of 0.27% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $24 per year of difference.
Which performed better, CGMU or IVV?
Over the past year CGMU returned +4.56% vs +21.89% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), CGMU annualized +5.25% vs +7.00% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, CGMU or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 5.0% for CGMU. Worst drawdown: CGMU -4.1% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both CGMU and IVV?
CGMU and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.68, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between CGMU and IVV?
CGMU and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 903 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, CGMU or IVV?
CGMU yields 3.38% while IVV yields 1.10%, so CGMU 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.