IVV vs KOKU
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Xtrackers MSCI Kokusai Equity ETF
Which is better, IVV or KOKU?
Nearly the same fund. IVV costs less.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.98. KOKU is less concentrated, with 28.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.1%.
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 | KOKU |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.09% |
| AUM | $882.6B | $802M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 1.39% |
| Holdings | 508 | 2,185 |
| YTD Return | +14.35%Best | +12.09% |
| 1Y Return | +16.68%Best | +14.80% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +23.33%Best | +22.04% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.92%Best | +12.44% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.3% | 15.1%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -24.5%Best | -25.8% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $19,187Best | $17,972 |
| Top 10 Weight | 38.1% | 28.6%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Xtrackers ETFs |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Apr 7, 2020 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Apr 8, 2020 to Oct 5, 2026 (6.5 years).
IVV vs KOKU 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 6.5 years both funds cover.
IVV vs KOKU Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Xtrackers MSCI Kokusai Equity ETF (KOKU) is an ETF from Xtrackers ETFs. Over the past year IVV returned +16.68% while KOKU returned +14.80%. Year to date, IVV is up 14.35% versus a gain of 12.09% for KOKU.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +23.33% per year against +22.04% for KOKU; over five years the annualized figures are +13.92% and +12.44% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +18.83% annualized vs +17.68%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.3% compared with 15.1% for KOKU. 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 -24.5% for IVV and -25.8% for KOKU. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.98. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while KOKU charges 0.09%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $9 annually, a gap of $6 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 1.39% for KOKU.
Holdings Overlap
97.6% of IVV's money is in holdings KOKU also owns. 74.0% of KOKU's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
Most of IVV is already inside KOKU. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
431 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 1,079 in KOKU, against full books of 508 and 2,185.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 72 positions for KOKU that do not appear in our book for IVV (2.5% of the fund), and 70 for IVV that do not appear in KOKU (1.9%).
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 KOKU | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.00% | 5.66% | 2.34% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 7.39% | 5.71% | 1.68% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.57% | 4.16% | 1.41% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.80% | 2.86% | 0.94% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 3.00% | 2.39% | 0.61% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.59% | 1.82% | 0.77% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 2.40% | 1.89% | 0.51% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 2.15% | 1.71% | 0.44% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.66% | 1.22% | 0.44% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 1.56% | 1.20% | 0.36% |
97.6% of IVV is already inside KOKU.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or KOKU?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while KOKU charges 0.09%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $6 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or KOKU?
Over the past year IVV returned +16.68% vs +14.80% for KOKU, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), IVV annualized +18.83% vs +17.68% for KOKU. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or KOKU?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 15.1% for KOKU. Worst drawdown: IVV -24.5% vs KOKU -25.8%.
Should I hold both IVV and KOKU?
IVV and KOKU have a monthly-return correlation of 0.98, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and KOKU?
97.6% of IVV's money is in holdings KOKU also owns. 74.0% of KOKU's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 431 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 1,079 in KOKU.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or KOKU?
IVV yields 1.06% while KOKU yields 1.39%, so KOKU currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is KOKU better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.98. KOKU is less concentrated, with 28.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.1%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.