FMAR vs IVV
FT Vest US Equity Buffer ETF - March 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 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FMAR | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.85% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $1.1B | $865.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.00% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 5 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +12.08% | +13.72% | |
| 1Y Return | +16.57% | +21.64% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +14.11% | +21.55% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +10.59% | +13.27% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 9.0% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -14.4% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Alternative | Equity | |
| Inception | Mar 19, 2021 | May 15, 2000 |
FMAR vs IVV Performance
FT Vest US Equity Buffer ETF - March (FMAR) 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 FMAR returned +16.57% while IVV returned +21.64%. Year to date, FMAR is up 12.08% versus a gain of 13.72% for IVV.
Over three years, FMAR compounded at +14.11% per year against +21.55% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +10.59% and +13.27% respectively. Across the full 5-year window we track, FMAR has the edge at +11.36% annualized vs +7.04%. 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 9.0% for FMAR. 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 -14.4% for FMAR 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 0.94. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FMAR charges 0.85% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $85 vs $3 annually, a gap of $82 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FMAR currently yields 0.00% against 1.09% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
FMAR and IVV share 0 holdings out of 506 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, FMAR or IVV?
FMAR has an expense ratio of 0.85% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $82 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FMAR or IVV?
Over the past year FMAR returned +16.57% vs +21.64% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (5 years), FMAR annualized +11.36% vs +7.04% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FMAR or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 9.0% for FMAR. Worst drawdown: FMAR -14.4% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both FMAR and IVV?
FMAR and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, 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 FMAR and IVV?
FMAR and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 506 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FMAR or IVV?
FMAR yields 0.00% while IVV yields 1.09%, 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.