FEMS vs IVV
First Trust Emerging Markets Small Cap 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 | FEMS | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.80% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $254M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 4.43% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 218 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +10.03% | +13.22% | |
| 1Y Return | +12.08% | +21.62% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +11.07% | +22.17% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +6.39% | +13.42% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.2% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -52.3% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Feb 15, 2012 | May 15, 2000 |
FEMS vs IVV Performance
First Trust Emerging Markets Small Cap AlphaDEX Fund (FEMS) 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 FEMS returned +12.08% while IVV returned +21.62%. Year to date, FEMS is up 10.03% versus a gain of 13.22% for IVV.
Over three years, FEMS compounded at +11.07% per year against +22.17% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +6.39% and +13.42% respectively. Across the full 15-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.02% annualized vs +4.66%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FEMS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.2% 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 -52.3% for FEMS 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 0.62. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FEMS 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, FEMS currently yields 4.43% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
FEMS and IVV share 0 holdings out of 708 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, FEMS or IVV?
FEMS 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, FEMS or IVV?
Over the past year FEMS returned +12.08% vs +21.62% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (15 years), FEMS annualized +4.66% vs +7.02% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FEMS or IVV?
FEMS has been the more volatile fund at 19.2% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: FEMS -52.3% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both FEMS and IVV?
FEMS and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.62, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between FEMS and IVV?
FEMS and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 708 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FEMS or IVV?
FEMS yields 4.43% while IVV yields 1.10%, so FEMS 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.