FTWO vs IVV
Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, FTWO or IVV?
Large Cap Growth against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. FTWO led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 54.6%.
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 | FTWO | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.49% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $78M | $886.7B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.94% | 1.10% |
| Holdings | 54 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +16.43%Best | +12.70% |
| 1Y Return | +29.87%Best | +19.36% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +26.17%Best | +21.16% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +12.75% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.9% | 12.8%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -18.2%Best | -18.8% |
| $10,000 over 3 years | $19,663Best | $17,615 |
| Top 10 Weight | 54.6% | 37.9%Best |
| Fund Family | Strive Asset Management | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Aug 31, 2023 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 31, 2023 to Sep 8, 2026 (3 years).
FTWO 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 3 years both funds cover.
FTWO vs IVV Performance
Strive Natural Resources and Security ETF (FTWO) is an ETF from Strive Asset Management and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year FTWO returned +29.87% while IVV returned +19.36%. Year to date, FTWO is up 16.43% versus a gain of 12.70% for IVV.
Over three years, FTWO compounded at +26.17% per year against +21.16% for IVV.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
FTWO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.9% compared with 12.8% 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 -18.2% for FTWO and -18.8% 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 0.47. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
FTWO charges 0.49% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $49 vs $3 annually, a gap of $46 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, FTWO currently yields 0.94% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
68.6% of FTWO's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 5.1% of IVV's money is in holdings FTWO also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
23 positions in common, counted across the 51 positions we hold weights for in FTWO and 504 in IVV, against full books of 54 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 470 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for FTWO (94.1% of the fund), and 15 for FTWO that do not appear in IVV (9.2%).
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.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in FTWO | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| DEDeere & Co. | 9.80% | 0.23% | 9.57% |
| XOMExxon Mobil Corp | 7.45% | 0.94% | 6.51% |
| CEGConstellation Energy Corp | 8.04% | 0.13% | 7.91% |
| GEGeneral Electric Co. | 5.76% | 0.60% | 5.16% |
| RTXRaytheon Co. | 4.48% | 0.45% | 4.03% |
| CVXChevron Corp.United States -Energy | 4.10% | 0.52% | 3.58% |
| NEMNewmont Corp. | 4.24% | 0.17% | 4.07% |
| CTVACorteva Inc. | 3.46% | 0.08% | 3.38% |
| FCXFreeport-McMoran Copper & Gold Inc | 3.25% | 0.15% | 3.10% |
| BABoeing Co | 2.59% | 0.28% | 2.31% |
68.6% of FTWO is already inside IVV.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, FTWO or IVV?
FTWO has an expense ratio of 0.49% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $46 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, FTWO or IVV?
Over the past year FTWO returned +29.87% vs +19.36% for IVV, so FTWO leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, FTWO or IVV?
FTWO has been the more volatile fund at 16.9% annualized versus 12.8% for IVV. Worst drawdown: FTWO -18.2% vs IVV -18.8%.
Should I hold both FTWO and IVV?
FTWO and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.47, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between FTWO and IVV?
68.6% of FTWO's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 5.1% of IVV's is in holdings FTWO also owns. They hold 23 positions in common, counted across the 51 positions we hold weights for in FTWO and 504 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, FTWO or IVV?
FTWO yields 0.94% while IVV yields 1.10%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than FTWO?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. FTWO led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 54.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.