IDGT vs IVV
iShares US Digital Infrastructure and Real Estate ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, IDGT or IVV?
Mid Cap Blend against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IDGT led over 1Y and 3Y, IVV over 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 64.3%.
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 | IDGT | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.37% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $504M | $876.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.78% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 30 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +36.49%Best | +12.51% |
| 1Y Return | +34.54%Best | +17.57% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +23.07%Best | +21.27% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.07% | +12.95%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 28.8% | 14.9%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -78.0% | -56.5%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $16,904 | $18,384Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 64.3% | 37.9%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jul 10, 2001 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 13, 2001 to Sep 11, 2026 (25.2 years).
IDGT 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 25.2 years both funds cover.
IDGT vs IVV Performance
iShares US Digital Infrastructure and Real Estate ETF (IDGT) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year IDGT returned +34.54% while IVV returned +17.57%. Year to date, IDGT is up 36.49% versus a gain of 12.51% for IVV.
Over three years, IDGT compounded at +23.07% per year against +21.27% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +11.07% and +12.95% respectively. Across the full 25-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.91% annualized vs +4.50%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IDGT has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 28.8% compared with 14.9% 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 -78.0% for IDGT and -56.5% 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 0.75. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IDGT charges 0.37% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $37 vs $3 annually, a gap of $34 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IDGT currently yields 0.78% against 1.06% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
64.4% of IDGT's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 2.2% of IVV's money is in holdings IDGT also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
13 positions in common, counted across the 26 positions we hold weights for in IDGT and 505 in IVV, against full books of 30 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 482 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for IDGT (97.1% of the fund), and 12 for IDGT that do not appear in IVV (32.4%).
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 IDGT | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| EQIXEquinix, Inc. | 9.14% | 0.16% | 8.98% |
| DLRDigital Realty Trust Inc. | 8.93% | 0.10% | 8.83% |
| AMTAmerican Tower Corp | 8.65% | 0.12% | 8.53% |
| ANETArista Networks Inc. | 5.57% | 0.31% | 5.26% |
| CCICrown Castle International Corp | 5.58% | 0.05% | 5.53% |
| SBACSba Communications Corp. | 5.49% | 0.03% | 5.46% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 4.28% | 0.72% | 3.56% |
| SMCISuper Micro Computer Inc | 4.61% | 0.03% | 4.58% |
| QCOMQualcomm Inc. | 4.16% | 0.25% | 3.91% |
| NTAPNetapp Inc. | 4.26% | 0.06% | 4.20% |
64.4% of IDGT 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, IDGT or IVV?
IDGT has an expense ratio of 0.37% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $34 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IDGT or IVV?
Over the past year IDGT returned +34.54% vs +17.57% for IVV, so IDGT leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (25 years), IDGT annualized +4.50% vs +7.91% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IDGT or IVV?
IDGT has been the more volatile fund at 28.8% annualized versus 14.9% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IDGT -78.0% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both IDGT and IVV?
IDGT and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.75, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between IDGT and IVV?
64.4% of IDGT's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 2.2% of IVV's is in holdings IDGT also owns. They hold 13 positions in common, counted across the 26 positions we hold weights for in IDGT and 505 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, IDGT or IVV?
IDGT yields 0.78% while IVV yields 1.06%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than IDGT?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IDGT led over 1Y and 3Y, IVV over 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 64.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.