GRX vs IVV
The Gabelli Healthcare & Wellness RX Trust vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, GRX or IVV?
IVV has been ahead.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. GRX is less concentrated, with 25.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.9%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GRX | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 3.00% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $233M | $886.7B |
| Dividend Yield | 6.25% | 1.10% |
| Holdings | 194 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +8.01% | +13.39%Best |
| 1Y Return | +13.79% | +20.08%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +8.90% | +21.29%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +0.04% | +12.88%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.6% | 15.6%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -65.0% | -56.5%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $10,020 | $18,327Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 25.4%Best | 37.9% |
| Fund Family | Gabelli Funds | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jun 19, 2007 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 29, 2007 to Sep 4, 2026 (19.2 years).
GRX vs IVV growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 19.2 years both funds cover.
GRX vs IVV Performance
The Gabelli Healthcare & Wellness RX Trust (GRX) is an ETF from Gabelli Funds and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year GRX returned +13.79% while IVV returned +20.08%. Year to date, GRX is up 8.01% versus a gain of 13.39% for IVV.
Over three years, GRX compounded at +8.90% per year against +21.29% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +0.04% and +12.88% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +9.35% annualized vs +3.11%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GRX has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.6% compared with 15.6% 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 -65.0% for GRX and -56.5% for IVV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.68. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GRX charges 3.00% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $300 vs $3 annually, a gap of $297 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GRX currently yields 6.25% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
45.1% of GRX's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 16.9% of IVV's money is in holdings GRX also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
The two holdings books were reported 127 days apart, GRX as of Mar 31, 2026 and IVV as of Aug 5, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
47 positions in common, counted across the 175 positions we hold weights for in GRX and 505 in IVV, against full books of 194 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 450 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for GRX (82.4% of the fund), and 91 for GRX that do not appear in IVV (36.8%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in GRX | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp. | 0.01% | 7.98% | 7.97% |
| ABBVAbbvie Inc. | 3.51% | 0.65% | 2.86% |
| MRKMerck & Company Inc | 3.57% | 0.48% | 3.09% |
| CICigna Corp. | 2.49% | 0.11% | 2.38% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 1.60% | 0.93% | 0.67% |
| CORCencora Inc | 2.23% | 0.09% | 2.14% |
| AMGNAmgen Inc. | 1.88% | 0.33% | 1.55% |
| COOCooper Cos. Inc. | 2.06% | 0.02% | 2.04% |
| BMYBristol-Myers Squibb Co. | 1.85% | 0.20% | 1.65% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 0.62% | 1.39% | 0.77% |
45.1% of GRX is already inside IVV.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GRX or IVV?
GRX has an expense ratio of 3.00% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $297 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, GRX or IVV?
Over the past year GRX returned +13.79% vs +20.08% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), GRX annualized +3.11% vs +9.35% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GRX or IVV?
GRX has been the more volatile fund at 18.6% annualized versus 15.6% for IVV. Worst drawdown: GRX -65.0% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both GRX and IVV?
GRX and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.68, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between GRX and IVV?
45.1% of GRX's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 16.9% of IVV's is in holdings GRX also owns. They hold 47 positions in common, counted across the 175 positions we hold weights for in GRX and 505 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, GRX or IVV?
GRX yields 6.25% while IVV yields 1.10%, so GRX currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than GRX?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. GRX is less concentrated, with 25.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.