IVV vs KAMO
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Kensington Credit Opportunities ETF
Which is better, IVV or KAMO?
IVV has been ahead.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y.
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 | KAMO |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.92% |
| AUM | $850.0B | $107M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 3.07% |
| Holdings | 1,018 | 6 |
| YTD Return | +12.12%Best | -4.01% |
| 1Y Return | +12.53%Best | -3.76% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.54% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.93% | - |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Kensington Funds |
| Category | Equity | Fixed Income |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | - |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Dec 16, 2025 |
Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window, Top 10 Weight.
IVV vs KAMO 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 KAMO Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Kensington Credit Opportunities ETF (KAMO) is an ETF from Kensington Funds. Over the past year IVV returned +12.53% while KAMO returned -3.76%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.12% versus a loss of 4.01% for KAMO.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while KAMO charges 0.92%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $92 annually, a gap of $89 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 3.07% for KAMO.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 505 holdings in IVV and 4 in KAMO, totalling 100.1% and 99.4% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 4 in KAMO, against full books of 1,018 and 6.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and KAMO 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 KAMO?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while KAMO charges 0.92%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $89 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or KAMO?
Over the past year IVV returned +12.53% vs -3.76% for KAMO, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or KAMO?
IVV yields 1.09% while KAMO yields 3.07%, so KAMO currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is KAMO better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.