FCT vs IVV
First Trust Senior Floating Rate Income Fund II 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 | FCT | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.67% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $252M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 11.84% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 221 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +2.69% | +14.29% | |
| 1Y Return | +7.32% | +21.79% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +10.56% | +22.19% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +5.74% | +13.28% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.8% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -72.7% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | May 25, 2004 | May 15, 2000 |
FCT vs IVV Performance
First Trust Senior Floating Rate Income Fund II (FCT) 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 FCT returned +7.32% while IVV returned +21.79%. Year to date, FCT is up 2.69% versus a gain of 14.29% for IVV.
Over three years, FCT compounded at +10.56% per year against +22.19% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +5.74% and +13.28% respectively. Across the full 22-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.06% annualized vs -0.76%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 14.8% for FCT. 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 -72.7% for FCT 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 0.57. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FCT charges 1.67% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $167 vs $3 annually, a gap of $164 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FCT currently yields 11.84% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
FCT and IVV share 0 holdings out of 611 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, FCT or IVV?
FCT has an expense ratio of 1.67% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $164 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FCT or IVV?
Over the past year FCT returned +7.32% vs +21.79% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (22 years), FCT annualized -0.76% vs +7.06% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FCT or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 14.8% for FCT. Worst drawdown: FCT -72.7% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both FCT and IVV?
FCT and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.57, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between FCT and IVV?
FCT and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 611 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FCT or IVV?
FCT yields 11.84% while IVV yields 1.10%, so FCT 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.