IVV vs KONG
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Formidable Fortress ETF
Which is better, IVV or KONG?
Large Cap Blend against Mid Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 38.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 43.3%.
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 | KONG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.89% |
| AUM | $882.6B | $23M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 0.34% |
| Holdings | 508 | 106 |
| YTD Return | +13.60%Best | +8.28% |
| 1Y Return | +16.32%Best | +7.74% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +23.81%Best | +10.40% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +14.03%Best | +7.17% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.6% | 12.2%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -24.5% | -20.0%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $19,279Best | $14,137 |
| Top 10 Weight | 38.1%Best | 43.3% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Formidable Funds |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Mid Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jul 21, 2021 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 22, 2021 to Oct 2, 2026 (5.2 years).
IVV vs KONG 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 5.2 years both funds cover.
IVV vs KONG Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Formidable Fortress ETF (KONG) is an ETF from Formidable Funds. Over the past year IVV returned +16.32% while KONG returned +7.74%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.60% versus a gain of 8.28% for KONG.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +23.81% per year against +10.40% for KONG; over five years the annualized figures are +14.03% and +7.17% respectively.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.6% compared with 12.2% for KONG. 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 -20.0% for KONG. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.83. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while KONG charges 0.89%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $89 annually, a gap of $86 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 0.34% for KONG.
Holdings Overlap
20.9% of IVV's money is in holdings KONG also owns. 85.8% of KONG's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
Most of KONG is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
27 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 34 in KONG, against full books of 508 and 106.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 7 positions for KONG that do not appear in our book for IVV (15.1% of the fund), and 470 for IVV that do not appear in KONG (78.4%).
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 KONG | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.00% | 3.89% | 4.11% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.57% | 6.30% | 0.73% |
| NOWServicenow, Inc | 0.21% | 6.66% | 6.45% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 2.15% | 3.07% | 0.92% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 2.40% | 2.73% | 0.33% |
| FASTFastenal Co. | 0.09% | 4.26% | 4.17% |
| EMEEmcor Group Inc | 0.05% | 4.19% | 4.14% |
| FFIVF5 Networks Inc. | 0.04% | 4.03% | 3.99% |
| TPLTexas Pacific Land Trust | 0.03% | 3.76% | 3.73% |
| IBKRInteractive Brokers Group Inc | 0.06% | 3.63% | 3.57% |
85.8% of KONG is already inside IVV.
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 KONG?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while KONG charges 0.89%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $86 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or KONG?
Over the past year IVV returned +16.32% vs +7.74% for KONG, 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 KONG?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.6% annualized versus 12.2% for KONG. Worst drawdown: IVV -24.5% vs KONG -20.0%.
Should I hold both IVV and KONG?
IVV and KONG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.83, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and KONG?
85.8% of KONG's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 85.8% of KONG's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 27 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 34 in KONG.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or KONG?
IVV yields 1.06% while KONG yields 0.34%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is KONG better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 38.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 43.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.