IVV vs IWM
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs iShares Russell 2000 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IWM delivered stronger 1-year returns. IWM offers more diversification with 1594 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | IWM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.19% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $79.5B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 0.88% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 1,996 | |
| YTD Return | +13.72% | +22.18% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.64% | +34.85% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.55% | +18.08% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.27% | +7.62% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 20.0% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -59.9% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | May 22, 2000 |
IVV vs IWM Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% while IWM returned +34.85%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.72% versus a gain of 22.18% for IWM.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.55% per year against +18.08% for IWM; over five years the annualized figures are +13.27% and +7.62% respectively. Across the full 26-year window we track, IWM has the edge at +7.75% annualized vs +7.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IWM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.0% 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 -56.5% for IVV and -59.9% for IWM. 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 0.87. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while IWM charges 0.19%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $19 annually, a gap of $16 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 0.88% for IWM.
Holdings Overlap
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or IWM?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while IWM charges 0.19%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $16 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or IWM?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% vs +34.85% for IWM, so IWM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (26 years), IVV annualized +7.04% vs +7.75% for IWM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or IWM?
IWM has been the more volatile fund at 20.0% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs IWM -59.9%.
Should I hold both IVV and IWM?
IVV and IWM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.87, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and IWM?
IVV and IWM share 2 common holdings with a 0.1% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2097 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or IWM?
IVV yields 1.09% while IWM yields 0.88%, 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.