CUT vs IVV
Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, CUT or IVV?
Mid Cap Value against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 51.5%.
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 | CUT | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.76% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $31M | $876.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 2.41% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 65 | 508 |
| YTD Return | -0.33% | +13.32%Best |
| 1Y Return | +1.18% | +17.08%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +0.78% | +22.72%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -3.13% | +13.20%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 22.9% | 15.7%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -70.0% | -55.3%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $8,530 | $18,588Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 51.5% | 37.8%Best |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Value | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Nov 9, 2007 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 9, 2007 to Sep 23, 2026 (18.9 years).
CUT 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 18.9 years both funds cover.
CUT vs IVV Performance
Invesco MSCI Global Timber ETF (CUT) is an ETF from Invesco (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year CUT returned +1.18% while IVV returned +17.08%. Year to date, CUT is down 0.33% versus a gain of 13.32% for IVV.
Over three years, CUT compounded at +0.78% per year against +22.72% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are -3.13% and +13.20% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +9.71% annualized vs +2.85%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
CUT has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 22.9% compared with 15.7% for IVV. 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 -70.0% for CUT and -55.3% 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 0.80. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
CUT charges 0.76% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $76 vs $3 annually, a gap of $73 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, CUT currently yields 2.41% against 1.06% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
26.9% of CUT's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 0.1% of IVV's money is in holdings CUT also owns.
CUT and IVV share little of their money.
5 positions in common, counted across the 51 positions we hold weights for in CUT and 490 in IVV, against full books of 65 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 477 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for CUT (98.5% of the fund), and 5 for CUT that do not appear in IVV (18.0%).
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.
26.9% of CUT 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, CUT or IVV?
CUT has an expense ratio of 0.76% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $73 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, CUT or IVV?
Over the past year CUT returned +1.18% vs +17.08% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), CUT annualized +2.85% vs +9.71% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, CUT or IVV?
CUT has been the more volatile fund at 22.9% annualized versus 15.7% for IVV. Worst drawdown: CUT -70.0% vs IVV -55.3%.
Should I hold both CUT and IVV?
CUT and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.80, 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 CUT and IVV?
26.9% of CUT's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 0.1% of IVV's is in holdings CUT also owns. They hold 5 positions in common, counted across the 51 positions we hold weights for in CUT and 490 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, CUT or IVV?
CUT yields 2.41% while IVV yields 1.06%, so CUT currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than CUT?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 51.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.