GBAB vs IVV
Guggenheim Taxable Municipal Bond & Investment Grade Debt Trust vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. GBAB offers more diversification with 636 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GBAB | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 2.93% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $394M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 10.66% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 636 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +0.10% | +12.28% | |
| 1Y Return | +1.43% | +20.94% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +7.62% | +21.81% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -2.45% | +13.05% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 11.7% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -35.8% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Guggenheim Investments | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Tax Preferred | Equity | |
| Inception | Oct 26, 2010 | May 15, 2000 |
GBAB vs IVV Performance
Guggenheim Taxable Municipal Bond & Investment Grade Debt Trust (GBAB) is a ETF from Guggenheim Investments and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year GBAB returned +1.43% while IVV returned +20.94%. Year to date, GBAB is up 0.10% versus a gain of 12.28% for IVV.
Over three years, GBAB compounded at +7.62% per year against +21.81% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are -2.45% and +13.05% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +6.98% annualized vs +0.77%. 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 11.7% for GBAB. 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 -35.8% for GBAB 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 0.30. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GBAB charges 2.93% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $293 vs $3 annually, a gap of $290 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GBAB currently yields 10.66% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GBAB or IVV?
GBAB has an expense ratio of 2.93% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $290 per year of difference.
Which performed better, GBAB or IVV?
Over the past year GBAB returned +1.43% vs +20.94% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), GBAB annualized +0.77% vs +6.98% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, GBAB or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 11.7% for GBAB. Worst drawdown: GBAB -35.8% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both GBAB and IVV?
GBAB and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.30, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between GBAB and IVV?
GBAB and IVV share 2 common holdings with a 0.5% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 717 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, GBAB or IVV?
GBAB yields 10.66% while IVV yields 1.10%, so GBAB 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.