CPRY vs IVV
Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - January vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, CPRY or IVV?
Option Writing against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window.
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 | CPRY | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.69% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $35M | $876.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 5 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +4.53% | +12.39%Best |
| 1Y Return | +8.21% | +16.61%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +21.38% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +13.51% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 3.0%Best | 12.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -3.2%Best | -18.8% |
| $10,000 over 1.7 years | $11,366 | $13,278Best |
| Fund Family | Calamos Investments | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Alternative | Equity |
| Style | Option Writing | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jan 2, 2025 | May 15, 2000 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.7 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jan 2, 2025 to Sep 18, 2026 (1.7 years).
CPRY 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 1.7 years both funds cover.
CPRY vs IVV Performance
Calamos Russell 2000 Structured Alt Protection ETF - January (CPRY) is an ETF from Calamos Investments and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year CPRY returned +8.21% while IVV returned +16.61%. Year to date, CPRY is up 4.53% versus a gain of 12.39% for IVV.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 12.9% compared with 3.0% for CPRY. 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 -3.2% for CPRY and -18.8% 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 0.68. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CPRY charges 0.69% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $69 vs $3 annually, a gap of $66 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CPRY currently yields 0.00% against 1.06% for IVV.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of CPRY and IVV you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, CPRY or IVV?
CPRY has an expense ratio of 0.69% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $66 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CPRY or IVV?
Over the past year CPRY returned +8.21% vs +16.61% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), CPRY annualized +7.82% vs +18.15% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CPRY or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 12.9% annualized versus 3.0% for CPRY. Worst drawdown: CPRY -3.2% vs IVV -18.8%.
Should I hold both CPRY and IVV?
CPRY and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.68, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, CPRY or IVV?
CPRY yields 0.00% while IVV yields 1.06%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than CPRY?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.