GLIN vs IVV
VanEck India Growth Leaders 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 | GLIN | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.72% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $96M | $865.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.84% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 84 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | -1.43% | +14.50% | |
| 1Y Return | +3.77% | +22.02% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +8.50% | +21.80% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +3.23% | +13.37% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 29.5% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -79.4% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | VanEck | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Aug 24, 2010 | May 15, 2000 |
GLIN vs IVV Performance
VanEck India Growth Leaders ETF (GLIN) is a ETF from VanEck and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year GLIN returned +3.77% while IVV returned +22.02%. Year to date, GLIN is down 1.43% versus a gain of 14.50% for IVV.
Over three years, GLIN compounded at +8.50% per year against +21.80% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +3.23% and +13.37% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.07% annualized vs -2.46%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GLIN has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 29.5% 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 -79.4% for GLIN 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 0.46. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GLIN charges 0.72% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $72 vs $3 annually, a gap of $69 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GLIN currently yields 0.84% against 1.09% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
GLIN and IVV share 0 holdings out of 585 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, GLIN or IVV?
GLIN has an expense ratio of 0.72% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $69 per year of difference.
Which performed better, GLIN or IVV?
Over the past year GLIN returned +3.77% vs +22.02% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), GLIN annualized -2.46% vs +7.07% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, GLIN or IVV?
GLIN has been the more volatile fund at 29.5% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: GLIN -79.4% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both GLIN and IVV?
GLIN and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.46, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between GLIN and IVV?
GLIN and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 585 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, GLIN or IVV?
GLIN yields 0.84% while IVV yields 1.09%, so IVV 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.