IVV vs KWEB
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF
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 | KWEB | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.69% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $5.4B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 7.43% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 34 | |
| YTD Return | +14.29% | -24.19% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.79% | -21.75% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.19% | +2.36% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.28% | -6.92% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 33.5% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -80.9% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | KraneShares | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jul 31, 2013 |
IVV vs KWEB Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) is a ETF from KraneShares. Over the past year IVV returned +21.79% while KWEB returned -21.75%. Year to date, IVV is up 14.29% versus a loss of 24.19% for KWEB.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +22.19% per year against +2.36% for KWEB; over five years the annualized figures are +13.28% and -6.92% respectively. Across the full 13-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.06% annualized vs +2.18%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
KWEB has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 33.5% 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 -80.9% for KWEB. 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 0.29. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while KWEB charges 0.69%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $69 annually, a gap of $66 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 7.43% for KWEB.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and KWEB share 0 holdings out of 536 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or KWEB?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while KWEB charges 0.69%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $66 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or KWEB?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.79% vs -21.75% for KWEB, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (13 years), IVV annualized +7.06% vs +2.18% for KWEB. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or KWEB?
KWEB has been the more volatile fund at 33.5% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs KWEB -80.9%.
Should I hold both IVV and KWEB?
IVV and KWEB have a monthly-return correlation of 0.29, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and KWEB?
IVV and KWEB share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 536 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or KWEB?
IVV yields 1.10% while KWEB yields 7.43%, so KWEB 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.