CLSM vs IVV
ETC Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. CLSM delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | CLSM | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.82% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $100M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.79% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 5 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +17.37% | +12.28% | |
| 1Y Return | +24.69% | +20.94% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +13.80% | +21.81% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +3.58% | +13.05% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.4% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -27.8% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | The Cabana Group, LLC | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Allocation/Balanced | Equity | |
| Inception | Jul 12, 2021 | May 15, 2000 |
CLSM vs IVV Performance
ETC Cabana Target Leading Sector Moderate ETF (CLSM) is a ETF from The Cabana Group, LLC and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year CLSM returned +24.69% while IVV returned +20.94%. Year to date, CLSM is up 17.37% versus a gain of 12.28% for IVV.
Over three years, CLSM compounded at +13.80% per year against +21.81% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +3.58% and +13.05% respectively. Across the full 5-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +6.98% annualized vs +3.63%. 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 12.4% for CLSM. 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 -27.8% for CLSM 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 0.73. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CLSM charges 0.82% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $82 vs $3 annually, a gap of $79 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CLSM currently yields 0.79% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
CLSM and IVV share 0 holdings out of 509 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, CLSM or IVV?
CLSM has an expense ratio of 0.82% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $79 per year of difference.
Which performed better, CLSM or IVV?
Over the past year CLSM returned +24.69% vs +20.94% for IVV, so CLSM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (5 years), CLSM annualized +3.63% vs +6.98% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, CLSM or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 12.4% for CLSM. Worst drawdown: CLSM -27.8% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both CLSM and IVV?
CLSM and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.73, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between CLSM and IVV?
CLSM and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 509 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, CLSM or IVV?
CLSM yields 0.79% 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.