IGF vs IVV
iShares Global Infrastructure 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 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IGF | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.39% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $10.9B | $865.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 2.90% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 98 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +7.71% | +13.80% | |
| 1Y Return | +12.31% | +23.01% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +15.45% | +21.77% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +10.33% | +13.39% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.5% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -59.5% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | Dec 10, 2007 | May 15, 2000 |
IGF vs IVV Performance
iShares Global Infrastructure ETF (IGF) 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 IGF returned +12.31% while IVV returned +23.01%. Year to date, IGF is up 7.71% versus a gain of 13.80% for IVV.
Over three years, IGF compounded at +15.45% per year against +21.77% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +10.33% and +13.39% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.04% annualized vs +2.28%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IGF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.5% 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 -59.5% for IGF 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 0.79. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IGF charges 0.39% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $39 vs $3 annually, a gap of $36 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IGF currently yields 2.90% against 1.09% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
IGF and IVV share 18 holdings out of 565 unique holdings combined, representing a 2.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IGF or IVV?
IGF has an expense ratio of 0.39% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $36 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IGF or IVV?
Over the past year IGF returned +12.31% vs +23.01% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), IGF annualized +2.28% vs +7.04% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IGF or IVV?
IGF has been the more volatile fund at 16.5% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IGF -59.5% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both IGF and IVV?
IGF and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.79, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IGF and IVV?
IGF and IVV share 18 common holdings with a 2.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 565 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IGF or IVV?
IGF yields 2.90% while IVV yields 1.09%, so IGF 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.