GMOM vs IVV
Cambria Global Momentum ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. GMOM delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GMOM | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.01% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $73M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.48% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 15 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +13.05% | +13.51% | |
| 1Y Return | +24.20% | +20.65% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +14.24% | +21.94% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.79% | +12.95% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 9.7% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -25.0% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Cambria Investment Management | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Allocation/Balanced | Equity | |
| Inception | Nov 3, 2014 | May 15, 2000 |
GMOM vs IVV Performance
Cambria Global Momentum ETF (GMOM) is a ETF from Cambria Investment Management and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year GMOM returned +24.20% while IVV returned +20.65%. Year to date, GMOM is up 13.05% versus a gain of 13.51% for IVV.
Over three years, GMOM compounded at +14.24% per year against +21.94% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +7.79% and +12.95% respectively. Across the full 12-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.02% annualized vs +6.00%. 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 9.7% for GMOM. 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 -25.0% for GMOM 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 0.64. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GMOM charges 1.01% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $101 vs $3 annually, a gap of $98 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GMOM currently yields 1.48% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
GMOM and IVV share 0 holdings out of 519 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, GMOM or IVV?
GMOM has an expense ratio of 1.01% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $98 per year of difference.
Which performed better, GMOM or IVV?
Over the past year GMOM returned +24.20% vs +20.65% for IVV, so GMOM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (12 years), GMOM annualized +6.00% vs +7.02% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, GMOM or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 9.7% for GMOM. Worst drawdown: GMOM -25.0% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both GMOM and IVV?
GMOM and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.64, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between GMOM and IVV?
GMOM and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 519 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, GMOM or IVV?
GMOM yields 1.48% while IVV yields 1.10%, so GMOM 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.