FTGC vs IVV
First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. FTGC delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | FTGC | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.98% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $3.1B | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 15.26% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 5 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +32.64% | +13.22% | |
| 1Y Return | +45.16% | +21.62% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +16.73% | +22.17% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +14.64% | +13.42% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.6% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -60.6% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | First Trust Portfolios (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Commodity | Equity | |
| Inception | Oct 21, 2013 | May 15, 2000 |
FTGC vs IVV Performance
First Trust Global Tactical Commodity Strategy Fund (FTGC) 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 FTGC returned +45.16% while IVV returned +21.62%. Year to date, FTGC is up 32.64% versus a gain of 13.22% for IVV.
Over three years, FTGC compounded at +16.73% per year against +22.17% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +14.64% and +13.42% respectively. Across the full 13-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.02% annualized vs +3.41%. 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 13.6% for FTGC. 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 -60.6% for FTGC 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 0.36. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FTGC charges 0.98% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $98 vs $3 annually, a gap of $95 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FTGC currently yields 15.26% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
FTGC and IVV share 0 holdings out of 507 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, FTGC or IVV?
FTGC has an expense ratio of 0.98% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $95 per year of difference.
Which performed better, FTGC or IVV?
Over the past year FTGC returned +45.16% vs +21.62% for IVV, so FTGC leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (13 years), FTGC annualized +3.41% vs +7.02% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, FTGC or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 13.6% for FTGC. Worst drawdown: FTGC -60.6% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both FTGC and IVV?
FTGC and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.36, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between FTGC and IVV?
FTGC and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 507 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, FTGC or IVV?
FTGC yields 15.26% while IVV yields 1.10%, so FTGC 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.