FGM vs IVV
First Trust Germany AlphaDEX Fund vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, FGM or IVV?
Mid Cap Blend against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. FGM led over 3Y, IVV over 1Y, 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 40.1%.
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 | FGM | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.80% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $100M | $886.7B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.40% | 1.10% |
| Holdings | 84 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +3.33% | +12.70%Best |
| 1Y Return | +14.01% | +19.36%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.77%Best | +21.16% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +4.75% | +12.75%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 19.8% | 14.1%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -53.6% | -33.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $12,612 | $18,221Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 40.1% | 37.9%Best |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Feb 14, 2012 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 17, 2012 to Sep 8, 2026 (14.6 years).
FGM 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 14.6 years both funds cover.
FGM vs IVV Performance
First Trust Germany AlphaDEX Fund (FGM) 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 FGM returned +14.01% while IVV returned +19.36%. Year to date, FGM is up 3.33% versus a gain of 12.70% for IVV.
Over three years, FGM compounded at +21.77% per year against +21.16% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +4.75% and +12.75% respectively. Across the full 15-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +13.19% annualized vs +6.26%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FGM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.8% compared with 14.1% 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 -53.6% for FGM and -33.9% 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 0.75. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FGM 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, FGM currently yields 1.40% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
1.6% of FGM's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 0.5% of IVV's money is in holdings FGM also owns.
FGM and IVV share little of their money.
1 positions in common, counted across the 40 positions we hold weights for in FGM and 504 in IVV, against full books of 84 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 492 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for FGM (98.7% of the fund), and 1 for FGM that do not appear in IVV (2.5%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in FGM | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MRKMerck & Co. Inc. | 1.64% | 0.48% | 1.16% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of FGM 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, FGM or IVV?
FGM has an expense ratio of 0.80% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $77 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FGM or IVV?
Over the past year FGM returned +14.01% vs +19.36% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (15 years), FGM annualized +6.26% vs +13.19% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FGM or IVV?
FGM has been the more volatile fund at 19.8% annualized versus 14.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: FGM -53.6% vs IVV -33.9%.
Should I hold both FGM and IVV?
FGM and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.75, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between FGM and IVV?
1.6% of FGM's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 0.5% of IVV's is in holdings FGM also owns. They hold 1 positions in common, counted across the 40 positions we hold weights for in FGM and 504 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, FGM or IVV?
FGM yields 1.40% while IVV yields 1.10%, so FGM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than FGM?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. FGM led over 3Y, IVV over 1Y, 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 40.1%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.