GDMA vs IVV
Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF 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 | GDMA | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.75% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $240M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 2.53% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 21 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +9.40% | +12.28% | |
| 1Y Return | +19.30% | +20.94% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.06% | +21.81% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.58% | +13.05% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 9.9% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -16.7% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Gadsden Funds | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Allocation/Balanced | Equity | |
| Inception | Nov 14, 2018 | May 15, 2000 |
GDMA vs IVV Performance
Gadsden Dynamic Multi-Asset ETF (GDMA) is a ETF from Gadsden Funds and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year GDMA returned +19.30% while IVV returned +20.94%. Year to date, GDMA is up 9.40% versus a gain of 12.28% for IVV.
Over three years, GDMA compounded at +15.06% per year against +21.81% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +8.58% and +13.05% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, GDMA has the edge at +9.06% annualized vs +6.98%. 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 9.9% for GDMA. 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 -16.7% for GDMA 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 0.48. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GDMA charges 0.75% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $75 vs $3 annually, a gap of $72 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GDMA currently yields 2.53% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
GDMA and IVV share 3 holdings out of 521 unique holdings combined, representing a 2.7% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GDMA or IVV?
GDMA has an expense ratio of 0.75% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $72 per year of difference.
Which performed better, GDMA or IVV?
Over the past year GDMA returned +19.30% vs +20.94% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), GDMA annualized +9.06% vs +6.98% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, GDMA or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 9.9% for GDMA. Worst drawdown: GDMA -16.7% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both GDMA and IVV?
GDMA and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.48, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between GDMA and IVV?
GDMA and IVV share 3 common holdings with a 2.7% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 521 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, GDMA or IVV?
GDMA yields 2.53% while IVV yields 1.10%, so GDMA 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.