FICS vs IVV
First Trust International Developed Capital Strength ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, FICS or IVV?
All Cap Blend against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. FICS is less concentrated, with 23.2% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.9%.
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 | FICS | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.70% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $210M | $886.7B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.80% | 1.10% |
| Holdings | 56 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +7.63% | +13.39%Best |
| 1Y Return | +11.81% | +20.08%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +12.79% | +21.29%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +4.79% | +12.88%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.5%Best | 15.1% |
| Max Drawdown | -29.2% | -24.5%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $12,636 | $18,327Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 23.2%Best | 37.9% |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | All Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Dec 15, 2020 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 16, 2020 to Sep 4, 2026 (5.7 years).
FICS 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 5.7 years both funds cover.
FICS vs IVV Performance
First Trust International Developed Capital Strength ETF (FICS) 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 FICS returned +11.81% while IVV returned +20.08%. Year to date, FICS is up 7.63% versus a gain of 13.39% for IVV.
Over three years, FICS compounded at +12.79% per year against +21.29% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +4.79% and +12.88% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +15.32% annualized vs +7.92%.
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 14.5% for FICS. 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 -29.2% for FICS and -24.5% 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 0.73. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FICS charges 0.70% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $70 vs $3 annually, a gap of $67 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FICS currently yields 1.80% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 50 holdings in FICS and 505 in IVV, totalling 99.8% and 100.0% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 50 positions we hold weights for in FICS and 505 in IVV, against full books of 56 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 497 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for FICS (99.3% of the fund), and 2 for FICS that do not appear in IVV (4.3%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of FICS 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, FICS or IVV?
FICS has an expense ratio of 0.70% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $67 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FICS or IVV?
Over the past year FICS returned +11.81% vs +20.08% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), FICS annualized +7.92% vs +15.32% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FICS or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 14.5% for FICS. Worst drawdown: FICS -29.2% vs IVV -24.5%.
Should I hold both FICS and IVV?
FICS and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.73, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, FICS or IVV?
FICS yields 1.80% while IVV yields 1.10%, so FICS currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than FICS?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. FICS is less concentrated, with 23.2% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.