GSLC vs IVV
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta US Large Cap Equity ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, GSLC or IVV?
Nearly the same fund. IVV costs less.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 1.00. GSLC is less concentrated, with 30.2% 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 | GSLC | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.09% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $15.2B | $876.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.92% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 438 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +10.62% | +12.51%Best |
| 1Y Return | +13.89% | +17.57%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +19.95% | +21.27%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.65% | +12.95%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.9%Best | 15.2% |
| Max Drawdown | -33.7%Best | -33.9% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,350 | $18,384Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 30.2%Best | 37.9% |
| Fund Family | Goldman Sachs Asset Management | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Sep 17, 2015 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 21, 2015 to Sep 11, 2026 (11 years).
GSLC 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 11 years both funds cover.
GSLC vs IVV Performance
Goldman Sachs ActiveBeta US Large Cap Equity ETF (GSLC) is an ETF from Goldman Sachs Asset Management and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year GSLC returned +13.89% while IVV returned +17.57%. Year to date, GSLC is up 10.62% versus a gain of 12.51% for IVV.
Over three years, GSLC compounded at +19.95% per year against +21.27% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +11.65% and +12.95% respectively. Across the full 11-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +13.91% annualized vs +13.17%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.2% compared with 14.9% for GSLC. 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 -33.7% for GSLC and -33.9% 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 1.00. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GSLC charges 0.09% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $9 vs $3 annually, a gap of $6 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GSLC currently yields 0.92% against 1.06% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
93.6% of GSLC's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 64.7% of IVV's money is in holdings GSLC also owns.
Most of GSLC is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
297 positions in common, counted across the 347 positions we hold weights for in GSLC and 505 in IVV, against full books of 438 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 198 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for GSLC (34.7% of the fund), and 44 for GSLC that do not appear in IVV (4.5%).
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 GSLC | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp. | 9.86% | 7.98% | 1.88% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.67% | 4.01% | 0.34% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 3.62% | 2.98% | 0.64% |
| METAMeta Platforms, Inc. | 2.75% | 1.94% | 0.81% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 2.11% | 1.51% | 0.60% |
| JPMJpmorgan Chase & Co. | 2.05% | 1.45% | 0.60% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 2.02% | 1.39% | 0.63% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 1.37% | 1.36% | 0.01% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson | 1.41% | 0.93% | 0.48% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc. | 1.14% | 1.18% | 0.04% |
93.6% of GSLC 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, GSLC or IVV?
GSLC has an expense ratio of 0.09% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $6 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, GSLC or IVV?
Over the past year GSLC returned +13.89% vs +17.57% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (11 years), GSLC annualized +13.17% vs +13.91% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GSLC or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.2% annualized versus 14.9% for GSLC. Worst drawdown: GSLC -33.7% vs IVV -33.9%.
Should I hold both GSLC and IVV?
GSLC and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 1.00, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between GSLC and IVV?
93.6% of GSLC's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 64.7% of IVV's is in holdings GSLC also owns. They hold 297 positions in common, counted across the 347 positions we hold weights for in GSLC and 505 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, GSLC or IVV?
GSLC yields 0.92% while IVV yields 1.06%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than GSLC?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 1.00. GSLC is less concentrated, with 30.2% 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.