GLOF vs IVV
iShares Global Equity Factor ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. GLOF delivered stronger 1-year returns. GLOF offers more diversification with 708 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GLOF | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.20% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $225M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.58% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 708 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +16.64% | +13.51% | |
| 1Y Return | +24.30% | +20.65% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +23.07% | +21.94% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.02% | +12.95% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.0% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -36.7% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Apr 28, 2015 | May 15, 2000 |
GLOF vs IVV Performance
iShares Global Equity Factor ETF (GLOF) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year GLOF returned +24.30% while IVV returned +20.65%. Year to date, GLOF is up 16.64% versus a gain of 13.51% for IVV.
Over three years, GLOF compounded at +23.07% per year against +21.94% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +12.02% and +12.95% respectively. Across the full 11-year window we track, GLOF has the edge at +9.31% annualized vs +7.02%. 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 15.0% for GLOF. 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 -36.7% for GLOF 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 0.95. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GLOF charges 0.20% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $20 vs $3 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GLOF currently yields 1.58% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
GLOF and IVV share 191 holdings out of 946 unique holdings combined, representing a 45.7% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GLOF or IVV?
GLOF has an expense ratio of 0.20% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $17 per year of difference.
Which performed better, GLOF or IVV?
Over the past year GLOF returned +24.30% vs +20.65% for IVV, so GLOF leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (11 years), GLOF annualized +9.31% vs +7.02% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, GLOF or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 15.0% for GLOF. Worst drawdown: GLOF -36.7% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both GLOF and IVV?
GLOF and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.95, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between GLOF and IVV?
GLOF and IVV share 191 common holdings with a 45.7% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 946 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, GLOF or IVV?
GLOF yields 1.58% while IVV yields 1.10%, so GLOF 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.