IBD vs IVV
Inspire Corporate Bond ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, IBD or IVV?
IVV has been ahead.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IBD is less concentrated, with 23.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%.
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 | IBD | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.41% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $502M | $876.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 4.32% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 248 | 508 |
| YTD Return | -0.98% | +14.15%Best |
| 1Y Return | +0.58% | +17.31%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +4.89% | +23.17%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +0.89% | +13.85%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 5.0%Best | 16.0% |
| Max Drawdown | -16.3%Best | -33.9% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $10,453 | $19,128Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 23.5%Best | 37.8% |
| Fund Family | Inspire ETFs | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity |
| Style | - | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jul 10, 2017 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 11, 2017 to Sep 21, 2026 (9.2 years).
IBD 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
IBD vs IVV Performance
Inspire Corporate Bond ETF (IBD) is an ETF from Inspire ETFs and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year IBD returned +0.58% while IVV returned +17.31%. Year to date, IBD is down 0.98% versus a gain of 14.15% for IVV.
Over three years, IBD compounded at +4.89% per year against +23.17% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +0.89% and +13.85% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +14.41% annualized vs +1.05%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.0% compared with 5.0% for IBD. 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 -16.3% for IBD 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 0.58. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IBD charges 0.41% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $41 vs $3 annually, a gap of $38 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IBD currently yields 4.32% against 1.06% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 238 holdings in IBD and 490 in IVV, totalling 97.7% 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 238 positions we hold weights for in IBD and 490 in IVV, against full books of 248 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Measured across the 238 and 490 positions we hold weights for.
IVV holds 479 positions IBD does not, 98.6% of the fund.
Largest: NVDA 8.07%, AAPL 7.02%, MSFT 5.69%, AMZN 3.84%, GOOGL 3.00%
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IBD 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, IBD or IVV?
IBD has an expense ratio of 0.41% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $38 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IBD or IVV?
Over the past year IBD returned +0.58% vs +17.31% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), IBD annualized +1.05% vs +14.41% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IBD or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 16.0% annualized versus 5.0% for IBD. Worst drawdown: IBD -16.3% vs IVV -33.9%.
Should I hold both IBD and IVV?
IBD and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.58, 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, IBD or IVV?
IBD yields 4.32% while IVV yields 1.06%, so IBD currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than IBD?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IBD is less concentrated, with 23.5% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.