GNOM vs IVV
Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. GNOM delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GNOM | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.50% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $79M | $865.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.15% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 52 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +30.83% | +13.43% | |
| 1Y Return | +73.35% | +22.61% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +10.25% | +21.47% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -8.20% | +13.26% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 29.8% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -75.0% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | Global X by mirae Asset | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Apr 5, 2019 | May 15, 2000 |
GNOM vs IVV Performance
Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF (GNOM) is a ETF from Global X by mirae Asset and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year GNOM returned +73.35% while IVV returned +22.61%. Year to date, GNOM is up 30.83% versus a gain of 13.43% for IVV.
Over three years, GNOM compounded at +10.25% per year against +21.47% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are -8.20% and +13.26% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.03% annualized vs -0.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GNOM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 29.8% 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 -75.0% for GNOM 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 0.63. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GNOM charges 0.50% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $50 vs $3 annually, a gap of $47 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GNOM currently yields 1.15% against 1.09% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
GNOM and IVV share 8 holdings out of 532 unique holdings combined, representing a 2.4% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GNOM or IVV?
GNOM has an expense ratio of 0.50% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $47 per year of difference.
Which performed better, GNOM or IVV?
Over the past year GNOM returned +73.35% vs +22.61% for IVV, so GNOM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), GNOM annualized -0.18% vs +7.03% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, GNOM or IVV?
GNOM has been the more volatile fund at 29.8% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: GNOM -75.0% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both GNOM and IVV?
GNOM and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.63, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between GNOM and IVV?
GNOM and IVV share 8 common holdings with a 2.4% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 532 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, GNOM or IVV?
GNOM yields 1.15% while IVV yields 1.09%, so GNOM 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.