FEBM vs IVV
FT Vest US Equity Max Buffer ETF - February vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, FEBM or IVV?
Multi Alternative against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.93.
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 | FEBM | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.85% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $46M | $876.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 10 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +4.09% | +12.27%Best |
| 1Y Return | +6.07% | +17.04%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | - | +21.24% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +13.08% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 2.5%Best | 13.1% |
| Max Drawdown | -2.6%Best | -16.6% |
| $10,000 over 1.6 years | $11,007 | $13,092Best |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Alternative | Equity |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Feb 21, 2025 | May 15, 2000 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.6 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 24, 2025 to Sep 17, 2026 (1.6 years).
FEBM 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 1.6 years both funds cover.
FEBM vs IVV Performance
FT Vest US Equity Max Buffer ETF - February (FEBM) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year FEBM returned +6.07% while IVV returned +17.04%. Year to date, FEBM is up 4.09% versus a gain of 12.27% 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 13.1% compared with 2.5% for FEBM. 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 -2.6% for FEBM and -16.6% 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 0.93. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FEBM charges 0.85% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $85 vs $3 annually, a gap of $82 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FEBM currently yields 0.00% against 1.06% for IVV.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of FEBM and IVV you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FEBM or IVV?
FEBM has an expense ratio of 0.85% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $82 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FEBM or IVV?
Over the past year FEBM returned +6.07% vs +17.04% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), FEBM annualized +6.18% vs +18.34% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FEBM or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 13.1% annualized versus 2.5% for FEBM. Worst drawdown: FEBM -2.6% vs IVV -16.6%.
Should I hold both FEBM and IVV?
FEBM and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.93, 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.
Which pays a higher dividend, FEBM or IVV?
FEBM yields 0.00% while IVV yields 1.06%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than FEBM?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.93. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.