CGV vs IVV
Conductor Global Equity Value 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 | CGV | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.25% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $135M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 4.87% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 90 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +12.23% | +12.71% | |
| 1Y Return | +19.92% | +21.89% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +13.70% | +22.08% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.96% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.4% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -16.6% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Conductor ETFs | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Apr 19, 2016 | May 15, 2000 |
CGV vs IVV Performance
Conductor Global Equity Value ETF (CGV) is a ETF from Conductor ETFs and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year CGV returned +19.92% while IVV returned +21.89%. Year to date, CGV is up 12.23% versus a gain of 12.71% for IVV.
Over three years, CGV compounded at +13.70% per year against +22.08% for IVV. Across the full 4-year window we track, CGV has the edge at +9.98% 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 13.4% for CGV. 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 -16.6% for CGV 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 0.57. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CGV charges 1.25% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $125 vs $3 annually, a gap of $122 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CGV currently yields 4.87% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
CGV and IVV share 5 holdings out of 581 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, CGV or IVV?
CGV has an expense ratio of 1.25% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $122 per year of difference.
Which performed better, CGV or IVV?
Over the past year CGV returned +19.92% vs +21.89% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), CGV annualized +9.98% vs +7.00% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, CGV or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 13.4% for CGV. Worst drawdown: CGV -16.6% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both CGV and IVV?
CGV and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.57, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between CGV and IVV?
CGV and IVV share 5 common holdings with a 0.4% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 581 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, CGV or IVV?
CGV yields 4.87% while IVV yields 1.10%, so CGV 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.