FLQM vs IVV
Franklin US Mid Cap Multifactor Index 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 | FLQM | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.30% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $1.6B | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.64% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 209 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +8.88% | +14.29% | |
| 1Y Return | +10.08% | +21.79% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +12.01% | +22.19% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.25% | +13.28% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.8% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -37.3% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Apr 26, 2017 | May 15, 2000 |
FLQM vs IVV Performance
Franklin US Mid Cap Multifactor Index ETF (FLQM) is a ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year FLQM returned +10.08% while IVV returned +21.79%. Year to date, FLQM is up 8.88% versus a gain of 14.29% for IVV.
Over three years, FLQM compounded at +12.01% per year against +22.19% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +7.25% and +13.28% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, FLQM has the edge at +11.28% annualized vs +7.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FLQM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.8% 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 -37.3% for FLQM 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 0.90. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FLQM charges 0.30% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $30 vs $3 annually, a gap of $27 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FLQM currently yields 1.64% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
FLQM and IVV share 93 holdings out of 617 unique holdings combined, representing a 3.8% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FLQM or IVV?
FLQM has an expense ratio of 0.30% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $27 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FLQM or IVV?
Over the past year FLQM returned +10.08% vs +21.79% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), FLQM annualized +11.28% vs +7.06% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FLQM or IVV?
FLQM has been the more volatile fund at 16.8% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: FLQM -37.3% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both FLQM and IVV?
FLQM and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.90, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between FLQM and IVV?
FLQM and IVV share 93 common holdings with a 3.8% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 617 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FLQM or IVV?
FLQM yields 1.64% while IVV yields 1.10%, so FLQM 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.