IVV vs JULJ
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Innovator Premium Income 30 Barrier ETF - July
Which is better, IVV or JULJ?
Large Cap Blend against Multi Alternative.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window.
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 | JULJ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.79% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $14M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 4.41% |
| Holdings | 508 | 18 |
| YTD Return | +11.03%Best | +0.55% |
| 1Y Return | +15.62%Best | +0.54% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.81%Best | +4.35% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.61% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.9% | 1.8%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -18.8% | -12.7%Best |
| $10,000 over 3.2 years | $17,655Best | $10,093 |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Innovator ETFs Trust |
| Category | Equity | Alternative |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Multi Alternative |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jul 3, 2023 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 3, 2023 to Sep 16, 2026 (3.2 years).
IVV vs JULJ 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 3.2 years both funds cover.
IVV vs JULJ Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Innovator Premium Income 30 Barrier ETF - July (JULJ) is an ETF from Innovator ETFs Trust. Over the past year IVV returned +15.62% while JULJ returned +0.54%. Year to date, IVV is up 11.03% versus a gain of 0.55% for JULJ.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +20.81% per year against +4.35% for JULJ.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 12.9% compared with 1.8% for JULJ. 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 -18.8% for IVV and -12.7% for JULJ. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.58. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while JULJ charges 0.79%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $79 annually, a gap of $76 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 4.41% for JULJ.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and JULJ 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 JULJ?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while JULJ charges 0.79%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $76 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or JULJ?
Over the past year IVV returned +15.62% vs +0.54% for JULJ, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or JULJ?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 12.9% annualized versus 1.8% for JULJ. Worst drawdown: IVV -18.8% vs JULJ -12.7%.
Should I hold both IVV and JULJ?
IVV and JULJ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.58, 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 JULJ?
IVV yields 1.06% while JULJ yields 4.41%, so JULJ currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is JULJ better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.