FSZ vs IVV
First Trust Switzerland AlphaDEX Fund 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 | FSZ | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.80% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $37M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 2.01% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 42 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +4.07% | +12.28% | |
| 1Y Return | +5.80% | +20.94% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +13.04% | +21.81% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +5.83% | +13.05% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.3% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -35.4% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Feb 14, 2012 | May 15, 2000 |
FSZ vs IVV Performance
First Trust Switzerland AlphaDEX Fund (FSZ) 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 FSZ returned +5.80% while IVV returned +20.94%. Year to date, FSZ is up 4.07% versus a gain of 12.28% for IVV.
Over three years, FSZ compounded at +13.04% per year against +21.81% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +5.83% and +13.05% respectively. Across the full 15-year window we track, FSZ has the edge at +8.08% annualized vs +6.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FSZ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.3% 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 -35.4% for FSZ 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 0.77. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FSZ 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, FSZ currently yields 2.01% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
FSZ and IVV share 0 holdings out of 545 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, FSZ or IVV?
FSZ has an expense ratio of 0.80% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $77 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FSZ or IVV?
Over the past year FSZ returned +5.80% vs +20.94% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (15 years), FSZ annualized +8.08% vs +6.98% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FSZ or IVV?
FSZ has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: FSZ -35.4% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both FSZ and IVV?
FSZ and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.77, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between FSZ and IVV?
FSZ and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 545 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FSZ or IVV?
FSZ yields 2.01% while IVV yields 1.10%, so FSZ 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.