IVV vs KEMX
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. KEMX delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | KEMX | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.24% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $127M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 2.39% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 296 | |
| YTD Return | +14.50% | +33.27% | |
| 1Y Return | +22.02% | +56.76% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.80% | +27.83% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.37% | +13.44% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 20.4% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -38.8% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | KraneShares | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Apr 12, 2019 |
IVV vs KEMX Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF (KEMX) is a ETF from KraneShares. Over the past year IVV returned +22.02% while KEMX returned +56.76%. Year to date, IVV is up 14.50% versus a gain of 33.27% for KEMX.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.80% per year against +27.83% for KEMX; over five years the annualized figures are +13.37% and +13.44% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, KEMX has the edge at +13.22% annualized vs +7.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
KEMX has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.4% 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 -38.8% for KEMX. 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 0.75. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while KEMX charges 0.24%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $24 annually, a gap of $21 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 2.39% for KEMX.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and KEMX share 1 holdings out of 785 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in IVV | Weight in KEMX | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| HAL | 0.04% | 0.24% | 0.20% |
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or KEMX?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while KEMX charges 0.24%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $21 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or KEMX?
Over the past year IVV returned +22.02% vs +56.76% for KEMX, so KEMX leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), IVV annualized +7.07% vs +13.22% for KEMX. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or KEMX?
KEMX has been the more volatile fund at 20.4% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs KEMX -38.8%.
Should I hold both IVV and KEMX?
IVV and KEMX have a monthly-return correlation of 0.75, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and KEMX?
IVV and KEMX share 1 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 785 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or KEMX?
IVV yields 1.09% while KEMX yields 2.39%, so KEMX 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.