DBA vs IVV
Invesco DB Agriculture Fund 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 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | DBA | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.88% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $1.2B | $865.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 3.42% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 17 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +8.84% | +13.80% | |
| 1Y Return | +8.24% | +23.01% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +12.09% | +21.77% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.73% | +13.39% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.3% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -68.0% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Invesco (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Commodity | Equity | |
| Inception | Jan 5, 2007 | May 15, 2000 |
DBA vs IVV Performance
Invesco DB Agriculture Fund (DBA) is a ETF from Invesco (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year DBA returned +8.24% while IVV returned +23.01%. Year to date, DBA is up 8.84% versus a gain of 13.80% for IVV.
Over three years, DBA compounded at +12.09% per year against +21.77% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +9.73% and +13.39% respectively. Across the full 20-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.04% annualized vs +1.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
DBA has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.3% compared with 15.1% 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 -68.0% for DBA 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 0.28. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
DBA charges 0.88% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $88 vs $3 annually, a gap of $85 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, DBA currently yields 3.42% against 1.09% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
DBA and IVV share 0 holdings out of 507 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, DBA or IVV?
DBA has an expense ratio of 0.88% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $85 per year of difference.
Which performed better, DBA or IVV?
Over the past year DBA returned +8.24% vs +23.01% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (20 years), DBA annualized +1.29% vs +7.04% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, DBA or IVV?
DBA has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: DBA -68.0% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both DBA and IVV?
DBA and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.28, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between DBA and IVV?
DBA and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 507 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, DBA or IVV?
DBA yields 3.42% while IVV yields 1.09%, so DBA 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.