ITB vs IVV
iShares US Home Construction 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 | ITB | IVV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.38% | 0.03% | |
| AUM | $2.3B | $865.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 0.61% | 1.09% | |
| Holdings | 48 | 508 | |
| YTD Return | +1.12% | +13.80% | |
| 1Y Return | -4.19% | +23.01% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +5.15% | +21.77% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +7.37% | +13.39% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 31.1% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -87.1% | -56.5% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 1, 2006 | May 15, 2000 |
ITB vs IVV Performance
iShares US Home Construction ETF (ITB) 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 ITB returned -4.19% while IVV returned +23.01%. Year to date, ITB is up 1.12% versus a gain of 13.80% for IVV.
Over three years, ITB compounded at +5.15% per year against +21.77% for IVV; over five years the annualized figures are +7.37% and +13.39% respectively. Across the full 20-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.04% annualized vs +3.62%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ITB has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 31.1% 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 -87.1% for ITB 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
ITB charges 0.38% per year while IVV charges 0.03%. On a $10,000 position that is $38 vs $3 annually, a gap of $35 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, ITB currently yields 0.61% against 1.09% for IVV.
Holdings Overlap
ITB and IVV share 11 holdings out of 539 unique holdings combined, representing a 1.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, ITB or IVV?
ITB has an expense ratio of 0.38% while IVV charges 0.03%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $35 per year of difference.
Which performed better, ITB or IVV?
Over the past year ITB returned -4.19% vs +23.01% for IVV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (20 years), ITB annualized +3.62% vs +7.04% for IVV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, ITB or IVV?
ITB has been the more volatile fund at 31.1% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: ITB -87.1% vs IVV -56.5%.
Should I hold both ITB and IVV?
ITB 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 ITB and IVV?
ITB and IVV share 11 common holdings with a 1.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 539 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, ITB or IVV?
ITB yields 0.61% while IVV yields 1.09%, so IVV 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.