IBLC vs IVV
iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IBLC | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.47% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $81M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 5.71% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 52 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +3.35% | +12.28% | |
| 1Y Return | +15.22% | +20.94% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +40.77% | +21.81% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | - | +13.05% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 67.2% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -62.5% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Alternative | Equity | |
| Inception | Apr 25, 2022 | May 15, 2000 |
IBLC vs IVV Performance
iShares Blockchain and Tech ETF (IBLC) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year IBLC returned +15.22% while IVV returned +20.94%. Year to date, IBLC is up 3.35% versus a gain of 12.28% for IVV.
Over three years, IBLC compounded at +40.77% per year against +21.81% for IVV. Across the full 4-year window we track, IBLC has the edge at +19.24% annualized vs +6.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IBLC has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 67.2% 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 -62.5% for IBLC 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 0.73. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IBLC charges 0.47% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $47 vs $3 annually, a gap of $44 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IBLC currently yields 5.71% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
IBLC and IVV share 9 holdings out of 538 unique holdings combined, representing a 7.6% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IBLC or IVV?
IBLC has an expense ratio of 0.47% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $44 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IBLC or IVV?
Over the past year IBLC returned +15.22% vs +20.94% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), IBLC annualized +19.24% vs +6.98% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IBLC or IVV?
IBLC has been the more volatile fund at 67.2% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IBLC -62.5% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both IBLC and IVV?
IBLC and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.73, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IBLC and IVV?
IBLC and IVV share 9 common holdings with a 7.6% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 538 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IBLC or IVV?
IBLC yields 5.71% while IVV yields 1.10%, so IBLC 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.