FCG vs IVV
First Trust Natural Gas ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. FCG delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FCG | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.57% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $611M | $865.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 2.24% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 40 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +27.45% | +13.43% | |
| 1Y Return | +36.22% | +22.61% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +7.50% | +21.47% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +19.75% | +13.26% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 40.9% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -97.6% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 8, 2007 | May 15, 2000 |
FCG vs IVV Performance
First Trust Natural Gas ETF (FCG) 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 FCG returned +36.22% while IVV returned +22.61%. Year to date, FCG is up 27.45% versus a gain of 13.43% for IVV.
Over three years, FCG compounded at +7.50% per year against +21.47% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +19.75% and +13.26% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.03% annualized vs -5.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FCG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 40.9% 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 -97.6% for FCG 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 0.54. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FCG charges 0.57% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $57 vs $3 annually, a gap of $54 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FCG currently yields 2.24% against 1.09% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
FCG and IVV share 8 holdings out of 539 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.6% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FCG or IVV?
FCG has an expense ratio of 0.57% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $54 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FCG or IVV?
Over the past year FCG returned +36.22% vs +22.61% for IVV, so FCG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), FCG annualized -5.26% vs +7.03% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FCG or IVV?
FCG has been the more volatile fund at 40.9% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: FCG -97.6% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both FCG and IVV?
FCG and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.54, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between FCG and IVV?
FCG and IVV share 8 common holdings with a 0.6% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 539 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FCG or IVV?
FCG yields 2.24% while IVV yields 1.09%, so FCG 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.