INMU vs IVV
iShares Intermediate Muni Income Active 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 | INMU | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.30% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $553M | $907.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 3.40% | 1.10% | |
| Holdings | 456 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +0.65% | +12.71% | |
| 1Y Return | +4.84% | +21.89% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +4.44% | +22.08% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +1.35% | +12.96% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 5.1% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -10.7% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | BlackRock, Inc. (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Fixed Income | Equity | |
| Inception | Mar 16, 2021 | May 15, 2000 |
INMU vs IVV Performance
iShares Intermediate Muni Income Active ETF (INMU) is a ETF from BlackRock, Inc. (US) and iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year INMU returned +4.84% while IVV returned +21.89%. Year to date, INMU is up 0.65% versus a gain of 12.71% for IVV.
Over three years, INMU compounded at +4.44% per year against +22.08% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +1.35% and +12.96% respectively. Across the full 5-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.00% annualized vs +1.78%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 5.1% for INMU. 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 -10.7% for INMU 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 0.67. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
INMU charges 0.30% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $30 vs $3 annually, a gap of $27 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, INMU currently yields 3.40% against 1.10% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
INMU and IVV share 0 holdings out of 626 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, INMU or IVV?
INMU has an expense ratio of 0.30% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $27 per year of difference.
Which performed better, INMU or IVV?
Over the past year INMU returned +4.84% vs +21.89% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (5 years), INMU annualized +1.78% vs +7.00% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, INMU or IVV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 5.1% for INMU. Worst drawdown: INMU -10.7% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both INMU and IVV?
INMU and IVV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.67, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between INMU and IVV?
INMU and IVV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 626 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, INMU or IVV?
INMU yields 3.40% while IVV yields 1.10%, so INMU 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.