ILCG vs IVV
iShares Morningstar Growth ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, ILCG or IVV?
Large Cap Growth against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. ILCG led over 3Y and the full window, IVV over 1Y and 5Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 49.3%.
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 | ILCG | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.04% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $3.1B | $876.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.43% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 331 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +10.22% | +12.51%Best |
| 1Y Return | +12.26% | +17.57%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +23.06%Best | +21.27% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.46% | +12.95%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.9% | 14.7%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -53.2%Best | -56.5% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,203 | $18,384Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 49.3% | 37.9%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | Jun 28, 2004 | May 15, 2000 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 2, 2004 to Sep 11, 2026 (22.2 years).
ILCG 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 22.2 years both funds cover.
ILCG vs IVV Performance
iShares Morningstar Growth ETF (ILCG) 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 ILCG returned +12.26% while IVV returned +17.57%. Year to date, ILCG is up 10.22% versus a gain of 12.51% for IVV.
Over three years, ILCG compounded at +23.06% per year against +21.27% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +11.46% and +12.95% respectively. Across the full 22-year window we track, ILCG has the edge at +10.89% annualized vs +9.40%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ILCG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.9% compared with 14.7% 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 -53.2% for ILCG 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 0.94. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
ILCG charges 0.04% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $4 vs $3 annually, a gap of $1 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ILCG currently yields 0.43% against 1.06% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
94.7% of ILCG's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 69.6% of IVV's money is in holdings ILCG also owns.
Most of ILCG is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
250 positions in common, counted across the 326 positions we hold weights for in ILCG and 505 in IVV, against full books of 331 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 246 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for ILCG (29.8% of the fund), and 68 for ILCG that do not appear in IVV (4.8%).
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 ILCG | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp. | 15.64% | 7.98% | 7.66% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 6.95% | 6.86% | 0.09% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 5.93% | 2.98% | 2.95% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.48% | 4.01% | 0.47% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp 4.100 Feb 06 37 | 2.71% | 5.44% | 2.73% |
| GOOGLAlphabet A Usd 0.001 | 3.67% | 3.19% | 0.48% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc | 2.94% | 2.56% | 0.38% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 2.85% | 1.39% | 1.46% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc. | 2.39% | 1.18% | 1.21% |
| METAMeta Platforms, Inc. | 1.42% | 1.94% | 0.52% |
94.7% of ILCG 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, ILCG or IVV?
ILCG has an expense ratio of 0.04% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $1 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, ILCG or IVV?
Over the past year ILCG returned +12.26% vs +17.57% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (22 years), ILCG annualized +10.89% vs +9.40% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, ILCG or IVV?
ILCG has been the more volatile fund at 16.9% annualized versus 14.7% for IVV. Worst drawdown: ILCG -53.2% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both ILCG and IVV?
ILCG and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between ILCG and IVV?
94.7% of ILCG's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 69.6% of IVV's is in holdings ILCG also owns. They hold 250 positions in common, counted across the 326 positions we hold weights for in ILCG and 505 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, ILCG or IVV?
ILCG yields 0.43% while IVV yields 1.06%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than ILCG?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. ILCG led over 3Y and the full window, IVV over 1Y and 5Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 49.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.