FAD vs IVV
First Trust Multi Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. FAD delivered stronger 1-year returns. FAD offers more diversification with 677 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FAD | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.63% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $608M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.10% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 677 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +15.70% | +13.22% | |
| 1Y Return | +25.82% | +21.62% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +23.20% | +22.17% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +10.44% | +13.42% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.7% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -54.5% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 8, 2007 | May 15, 2000 |
FAD vs IVV Performance
First Trust Multi Cap Growth AlphaDEX Fund (FAD) is a ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year FAD returned +25.82% while IVV returned +21.62%. Year to date, FAD is up 15.70% versus a gain of 13.22% for IVV.
Over three years, FAD compounded at +23.20% per year against +22.17% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +10.44% and +13.42% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, FAD has the edge at +10.17% annualized vs +7.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FAD has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.7% 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 -54.5% for FAD 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 0.90. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FAD charges 0.63% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $63 vs $3 annually, a gap of $60 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FAD currently yields 0.10% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
FAD and IVV share 151 holdings out of 1017 unique holdings combined, representing a 19.9% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FAD or IVV?
FAD has an expense ratio of 0.63% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $60 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FAD or IVV?
Over the past year FAD returned +25.82% vs +21.62% for IVV, so FAD leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), FAD annualized +10.17% vs +7.02% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FAD or IVV?
FAD has been the more volatile fund at 18.7% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: FAD -54.5% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both FAD and IVV?
FAD and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.90, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between FAD and IVV?
FAD and IVV share 151 common holdings with a 19.9% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 1017 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FAD or IVV?
FAD yields 0.10% 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.