IVV vs KMF
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Kayne Anderson NextGen Energy & Infrastructure Inc
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | KMF | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 3.20% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $501M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 0.00% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 39 | |
| YTD Return | +13.22% | +0.00% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.62% | +0.00% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.17% | +4.81% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.42% | +5.17% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 33.2% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -94.3% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Kayne Anderson Capital Advisors | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Nov 24, 2010 |
IVV vs KMF Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Kayne Anderson NextGen Energy & Infrastructure Inc (KMF) is a ETF from Kayne Anderson Capital Advisors. Over the past year IVV returned +21.62% while KMF returned +0.00%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.22% versus a gain of 0.00% for KMF.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +22.17% per year against +4.81% for KMF; over five years the annualized figures are +13.42% and +5.17% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.02% annualized vs -0.39%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
KMF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 33.2% 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 -94.3% for KMF. 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 0.67. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while KMF charges 3.20%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $320 annually, a gap of $317 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 0.00% for KMF.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and KMF share 10 holdings out of 526 unique holdings combined, representing a 2.1% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or KMF?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while KMF charges 3.20%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $317 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or KMF?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.62% vs +0.00% for KMF, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), IVV annualized +7.02% vs -0.39% for KMF. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or KMF?
KMF has been the more volatile fund at 33.2% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs KMF -94.3%.
Should I hold both IVV and KMF?
IVV and KMF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.67, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and KMF?
IVV and KMF share 10 common holdings with a 2.1% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 526 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or KMF?
IVV yields 1.10% while KMF yields 0.00%, 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.