IMCB vs IVV
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF vs iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
Which is better, IMCB or IVV?
Mid Cap Blend against Large Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IMCB led over 1Y, IVV over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. IMCB is less concentrated, with 7.4% 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 | IMCB | IVV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.04% | 0.03%Best |
| AUM | $1.7B | $876.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.19% | 1.06% |
| Holdings | 399 | 508 |
| YTD Return | +15.31%Best | +11.03% |
| 1Y Return | +17.77%Best | +15.62% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +17.46% | +20.81%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +8.50% | +12.61%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 17.2% | 14.8%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -59.6% | -56.5%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $15,037 | $18,109Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 7.4%Best | 37.8% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Mid Cap Blend | 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 16, 2026 (22.2 years).
IMCB 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.
IMCB vs IVV Performance
iShares Morningstar Mid-Cap ETF (IMCB) 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 IMCB returned +17.77% while IVV returned +15.62%. Year to date, IMCB is up 15.31% versus a gain of 11.03% for IVV.
Over three years, IMCB compounded at +17.46% per year against +20.81% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +8.50% and +12.61% respectively. Across the full 22-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +9.32% annualized vs +9.13%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IMCB has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.2% compared with 14.8% 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 -59.6% for IMCB 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
IMCB 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, IMCB currently yields 1.19% against 1.06% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
81.2% of IMCB's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 18.3% of IVV's money is in holdings IMCB also owns.
Most of IMCB is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
287 positions in common, counted across the 388 positions we hold weights for in IMCB and 490 in IVV, against full books of 399 and 508.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 196 positions for IVV that do not appear in our book for IMCB (80.3% of the fund), and 90 for IMCB that do not appear in IVV (15.7%).
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 IMCB | Weight in IVV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| DELLDell Technologies Inc | 0.89% | 0.20% | 0.69% |
| ADPAutomatic Data Processing, Inc. | 0.78% | 0.17% | 0.61% |
| MPCMarathon Petroleum Corp | 0.74% | 0.16% | 0.58% |
| FCXFreeport-mcmoran Copper & Gold Inc. | 0.74% | 0.16% | 0.58% |
| BKBank Of New York Mellon Corp | 0.73% | 0.17% | 0.56% |
| FTNTFortinet Inc | 0.72% | 0.16% | 0.56% |
| VLOValero Energy | 0.72% | 0.16% | 0.56% |
| PSXPhillips 66 | 0.68% | 0.15% | 0.53% |
| PNCPnc Financial Services Group Inc. | 0.66% | 0.15% | 0.51% |
| USBUS Bancorp | 0.65% | 0.14% | 0.51% |
81.2% of IMCB 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, IMCB or IVV?
IMCB 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, IMCB or IVV?
Over the past year IMCB returned +17.77% vs +15.62% for IVV, so IMCB leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (22 years), IMCB annualized +9.13% vs +9.32% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IMCB or IVV?
IMCB has been the more volatile fund at 17.2% annualized versus 14.8% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IMCB -59.6% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both IMCB and IVV?
IMCB 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 IMCB and IVV?
81.2% of IMCB's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 18.3% of IVV's is in holdings IMCB also owns. They hold 287 positions in common, counted across the 388 positions we hold weights for in IMCB and 490 in IVV.
Which pays a higher dividend, IMCB or IVV?
IMCB yields 1.19% while IVV yields 1.06%, so IMCB currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is IVV better than IMCB?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IMCB led over 1Y, IVV over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. IMCB is less concentrated, with 7.4% 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.