DWWN vs IVV
Principal Long Duration ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, DWWN or IVV?
Long Term Bond against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. DWWN is less concentrated, with 29.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.9%.
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 | DWWN | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.19% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $11M | $876.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.97% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 56 | 508 |
| YTD Return | -5.27% | +12.51%Best |
| 1Y Return | - | +17.57% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +21.27% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.95% |
| Top 10 Weight | 29.9%Best | 37.9% |
| Fund Family | Principal Funds | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity |
| Style | Long Term Bond | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 21, 2026 | May 15, 2000 |
Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.
DWWN 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
DWWN vs IVV Performance
Principal Long Duration ETF (DWWN) is an ETF from Principal Funds and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Year to date, DWWN is down 5.27% versus a gain of 12.51% for IVV.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
DWWN charges 0.19% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $19 vs $3 annually, a gap of $16 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, DWWN currently yields 0.97% against 1.06% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 56 holdings in DWWN and 505 in IVV, totalling 95.8% and 100.0% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 56 positions we hold weights for in DWWN and 505 in IVV, against full books of 56 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Measured across the 56 and 505 positions we hold weights for.
IVV holds 495 positions DWWN does not, 99.3% of the fund.
Largest: NVDA 7.98%, AAPL 6.86%, MSFT 5.44%, AMZN 4.01%, GOOGL 3.19%
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of DWWN 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, DWWN or IVV?
DWWN has an expense ratio of 0.19% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $16 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which pays a higher dividend, DWWN or IVV?
DWWN yields 0.97% while IVV yields 1.06%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than DWWN?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. DWWN is less concentrated, with 29.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.