FFLG vs IVV
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF 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 | FFLG | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.38% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $590M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.14% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 104 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +9.91% | +12.71% | |
| 1Y Return | +19.70% | +21.89% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +25.82% | +22.08% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +9.46% | +12.96% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 22.3% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -44.6% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Fidelity Investments (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Feb 2, 2021 | May 15, 2000 |
FFLG vs IVV Performance
Fidelity Fundamental Large Cap Growth ETF (FFLG) is a ETF from Fidelity Investments (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year FFLG returned +19.70% while IVV returned +21.89%. Year to date, FFLG is up 9.91% versus a gain of 12.71% for IVV.
Over three years, FFLG compounded at +25.82% per year against +22.08% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +9.46% and +12.96% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, FFLG has the edge at +9.46% annualized vs +7.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FFLG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 22.3% 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 -44.6% for FFLG 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 0.88. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FFLG charges 0.38% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $38 vs $3 annually, a gap of $35 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FFLG currently yields 0.14% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
FFLG and IVV share 61 holdings out of 545 unique holdings combined, representing a 46.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FFLG or IVV?
FFLG has an expense ratio of 0.38% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $35 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FFLG or IVV?
Over the past year FFLG returned +19.70% vs +21.89% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), FFLG annualized +9.46% vs +7.00% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FFLG or IVV?
FFLG has been the more volatile fund at 22.3% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: FFLG -44.6% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both FFLG and IVV?
FFLG and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.88, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between FFLG and IVV?
FFLG and IVV share 61 common holdings with a 46.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 545 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FFLG or IVV?
FFLG yields 0.14% while IVV yields 1.10%, so IVV 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.