IVV vs KURE
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF
Which is better, IVV or KURE?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 55.2%.
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 | KURE |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.65% |
| AUM | $886.7B | $110M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 4.16% |
| Holdings | 508 | 54 |
| YTD Return | +13.39%Best | +8.68% |
| 1Y Return | +20.08%Best | -4.17% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.29%Best | +4.69% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.88%Best | -9.30% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.4%Best | 28.1% |
| Max Drawdown | -33.9%Best | -68.5% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,327Best | $6,138 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.9%Best | 55.2% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | KraneShares |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jan 31, 2018 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 1, 2018 to Sep 4, 2026 (8.6 years).
IVV vs KURE 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 8.6 years both funds cover.
IVV vs KURE Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and KraneShares MSCI All China Health Care Index ETF (KURE) is an ETF from KraneShares. Over the past year IVV returned +20.08% while KURE returned -4.17%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.39% versus a gain of 8.68% for KURE.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.29% per year against +4.69% for KURE; over five years the annualized figures are +12.88% and -9.30% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +13.40% annualized vs -0.83%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
KURE has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 28.1% compared with 16.4% 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 -33.9% for IVV and -68.5% for KURE. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.22. They move largely independently of each other.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while KURE charges 0.65%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $65 annually, a gap of $62 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 4.16% for KURE.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 505 holdings in IVV and 45 in KURE, totalling 100.0% and 99.5% 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 45 in KURE, against full books of 508 and 54.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1 positions for KURE that do not appear in our book for IVV (0.8% of the fund), and 497 for IVV that do not appear in KURE (99.3%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and KURE 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 KURE?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while KURE charges 0.65%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $62 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or KURE?
Over the past year IVV returned +20.08% vs -4.17% for KURE, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), IVV annualized +13.40% vs -0.83% for KURE. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or KURE?
KURE has been the more volatile fund at 28.1% annualized versus 16.4% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -33.9% vs KURE -68.5%.
Should I hold both IVV and KURE?
IVV and KURE have a monthly-return correlation of 0.22, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or KURE?
IVV yields 1.10% while KURE yields 4.16%, so KURE currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is KURE better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 55.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.