HF vs IVV
DGA Core Plus Absolute Return ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, HF or IVV?
Multi Alternative against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 82.3%.
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 | HF | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 1.70% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $21M | $876.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.88% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 17 | 508 |
| Volatility (annualized) | 7.3%Best | 12.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -4.3%Best | -8.6% |
| $10,000 over 1.4 years | $11,548 | $13,840Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 82.3% | 37.8%Best |
| Fund Family | Days Global Advisors | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Alternative | Equity |
| Style | Multi Alternative | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Aug 2, 2023 | May 15, 2000 |
Not shown on this pair: YTD Return, 1Y Return, 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized).
The two price series end 645 days apart, so a return over any period would be measuring two different stretches of market. Those rows are withheld. HF has data through Dec 12, 2024 and IVV through Sep 18, 2026.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.4 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 3, 2023 to Dec 12, 2024 (1.4 years).
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 12.9% compared with 7.3% for HF. 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 -4.3% for HF and -8.6% 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 0.78. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
HF charges 1.70% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $170 vs $3 annually, a gap of $167 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, HF currently yields 0.88% against 1.06% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 18 holdings in HF and 490 in IVV, totalling 100.0% and 99.3% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 18 positions we hold weights for in HF and 490 in IVV, against full books of 17 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 482 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for HF (98.6% of the fund), and 17 for HF that do not appear in IVV (97.5%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of HF and IVV you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, HF or IVV?
HF has an expense ratio of 1.70% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $167 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which is riskier, HF or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 12.9% annualized versus 7.3% for HF. Worst drawdown: HF -4.3% vs IVV -8.6%.
Should I hold both HF and IVV?
HF and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.78, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, HF or IVV?
HF yields 0.88% while IVV yields 1.06%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than HF?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 82.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.