GXC vs IVV
State Street SPDR S&P China ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. GXC offers more diversification with 1,267 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GXC | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.59% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $472M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 2.19% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 1,267 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | -8.35% | +12.28% | |
| 1Y Return | -3.21% | +20.94% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +10.91% | +21.81% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | -1.27% | +13.05% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 25.9% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -72.3% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Mar 19, 2007 | May 15, 2000 |
GXC vs IVV Performance
State Street SPDR S&P China ETF (GXC) is a ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year GXC returned -3.21% while IVV returned +20.94%. Year to date, GXC is down 8.35% versus a gain of 12.28% for IVV.
Over three years, GXC compounded at +10.91% per year against +21.81% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are -1.27% and +13.05% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +6.98% annualized vs +3.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GXC has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 25.9% 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 -72.3% for GXC 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 0.52. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GXC charges 0.59% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $59 vs $3 annually, a gap of $56 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GXC currently yields 2.19% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
GXC and IVV share 1 holdings out of 1737 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in GXC | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| UNH | 0.01% | 0.61% | 0.60% |
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GXC or IVV?
GXC has an expense ratio of 0.59% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $56 per year of difference.
Which performed better, GXC or IVV?
Over the past year GXC returned -3.21% vs +20.94% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), GXC annualized +3.38% vs +6.98% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, GXC or IVV?
GXC has been the more volatile fund at 25.9% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: GXC -72.3% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both GXC and IVV?
GXC and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.52, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between GXC and IVV?
GXC and IVV share 1 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 1737 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, GXC or IVV?
GXC yields 2.19% while IVV yields 1.10%, so GXC 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.