FCA vs IVV
First Trust China AlphaDEX 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 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FCA | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.80% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $32M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 2.86% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 53 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | -6.10% | +14.29% | |
| 1Y Return | +3.90% | +21.79% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +16.32% | +22.19% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +2.41% | +13.28% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 25.2% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -47.6% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Apr 18, 2011 | May 15, 2000 |
FCA vs IVV Performance
First Trust China AlphaDEX Fund (FCA) 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 FCA returned +3.90% while IVV returned +21.79%. Year to date, FCA is down 6.10% versus a gain of 14.29% for IVV.
Over three years, FCA compounded at +16.32% per year against +22.19% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +2.41% and +13.28% respectively. Across the full 15-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.06% annualized vs +0.88%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FCA has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 25.2% 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 -47.6% for FCA 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 0.45. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FCA charges 0.80% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $80 vs $3 annually, a gap of $77 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FCA currently yields 2.86% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
FCA and IVV share 0 holdings out of 555 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, FCA or IVV?
FCA has an expense ratio of 0.80% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $77 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FCA or IVV?
Over the past year FCA returned +3.90% vs +21.79% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (15 years), FCA annualized +0.88% vs +7.06% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FCA or IVV?
FCA has been the more volatile fund at 25.2% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: FCA -47.6% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both FCA and IVV?
FCA and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.45, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between FCA and IVV?
FCA and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 555 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FCA or IVV?
FCA yields 2.86% while IVV yields 1.10%, so FCA 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.