IVV vs JQC
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Nuveen Credit Strategies Income Fund
Which is better, IVV or JQC?
Large Cap Blend against Bank Loan.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. JQC is less concentrated, with 23.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.9%.
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 | IVV | JQC |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 5.48% |
| AUM | $886.7B | - |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 11.71% |
| Holdings | 508 | 471 |
| YTD Return | +13.39%Best | +3.04% |
| 1Y Return | +20.08%Best | -1.38% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.29%Best | +10.21% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.88%Best | +5.05% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.5%Best | 16.7% |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5%Best | -81.3% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,327Best | $12,793 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.9% | 23.6%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Nuveen |
| Category | Equity | Fixed Income |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Bank Loan |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jun 25, 2003 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 26, 2003 to Sep 4, 2026 (23.2 years).
IVV vs JQC 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
IVV vs JQC Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Nuveen Credit Strategies Income Fund (JQC) is an ETF from Nuveen. Over the past year IVV returned +20.08% while JQC returned -1.38%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.39% versus a gain of 3.04% for JQC.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.29% per year against +10.21% for JQC; over five years the annualized figures are +12.88% and +5.05% respectively. Across the full 23-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +9.64% annualized vs -2.29%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
JQC has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.7% compared with 14.5% 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 -81.3% for JQC. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.61. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while JQC charges 5.48%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $548 annually, a gap of $545 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 11.71% for JQC.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 505 holdings in IVV and 264 in JQC, totalling 100.0% and 103.5% of the two funds. That is not enough of JQC to divide by, so no overlap percentage is shown here. Within what we can see, 1 positions appear in both.
The two holdings books were reported 186 days apart, IVV as of Aug 5, 2026 and JQC as of Jan 31, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
1 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 264 in JQC, against full books of 508 and 471.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 253 positions for JQC that do not appear in our book for IVV (103.5% of the fund), and 496 for IVV that do not appear in JQC (99.3%).
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 IVV | Weight in JQC | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| LYBLyondellbasell-a | 0.02% | 0.00% | 0.02% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and JQC you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or JQC?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while JQC charges 5.48%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $545 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or JQC?
Over the past year IVV returned +20.08% vs -1.38% for JQC, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (23 years), IVV annualized +9.64% vs -2.29% for JQC. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or JQC?
JQC has been the more volatile fund at 16.7% annualized versus 14.5% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs JQC -81.3%.
Should I hold both IVV and JQC?
IVV and JQC have a monthly-return correlation of 0.61, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or JQC?
IVV yields 1.10% while JQC yields 11.71%, so JQC currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is JQC better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. JQC is less concentrated, with 23.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.