FBUF vs IVV
Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, FBUF or IVV?
IVV has been ahead.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.9%.
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 | FBUF | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.48% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $24M | $876.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.57% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 179 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +7.30% | +11.03%Best |
| 1Y Return | +11.97% | +15.62%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +20.81% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.61% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 6.9%Best | 11.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -11.1%Best | -18.8% |
| $10,000 over 2.4 years | $13,355 | $14,901Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 38.9% | 37.8%Best |
| Fund Family | Fidelity Investments (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Apr 9, 2024 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.4 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Apr 11, 2024 to Sep 16, 2026 (2.4 years).
FBUF 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 2.4 years both funds cover.
FBUF vs IVV Performance
Fidelity Dynamic Buffered Equity ETF (FBUF) is an ETF from Fidelity Investments (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year FBUF returned +11.97% while IVV returned +15.62%. Year to date, FBUF is up 7.30% versus a gain of 11.03% 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 11.9% compared with 6.9% for FBUF. 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 -11.1% for FBUF 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 0.94. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FBUF charges 0.48% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $48 vs $3 annually, a gap of $45 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FBUF currently yields 0.57% against 1.06% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
87.6% of FBUF's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 66.6% of IVV's money is in holdings FBUF also owns.
Most of FBUF is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
101 positions in common, counted across the 170 positions we hold weights for in FBUF and 490 in IVV, against full books of 179 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 381 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for FBUF (32.0% of the fund), and 60 for FBUF that do not appear in IVV (9.7%).
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.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in FBUF | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.37% | 8.07% | 0.30% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 7.35% | 7.02% | 0.33% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.11% | 5.69% | 0.58% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.05% | 3.84% | 0.21% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 3.18% | 3.00% | 0.18% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.75% | 2.65% | 0.10% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc | 2.11% | 2.39% | 0.28% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 2.07% | 1.90% | 0.17% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.65% | 1.63% | 0.02% |
| BRK.BBerkshire Hathaway Inc Brk/B Us Equity | 1.85% | 1.39% | 0.46% |
87.6% of FBUF 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, FBUF or IVV?
FBUF has an expense ratio of 0.48% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $45 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FBUF or IVV?
Over the past year FBUF returned +11.97% vs +15.62% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), FBUF annualized +12.81% vs +18.08% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FBUF or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 11.9% annualized versus 6.9% for FBUF. Worst drawdown: FBUF -11.1% vs IVV -18.8%.
Should I hold both FBUF and IVV?
FBUF and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between FBUF and IVV?
87.6% of FBUF's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 66.6% of IVV's is in holdings FBUF also owns. They hold 101 positions in common, counted across the 170 positions we hold weights for in FBUF and 490 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, FBUF or IVV?
FBUF yields 0.57% while IVV yields 1.06%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than FBUF?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.