IVV vs LCLG
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Logan Capital Broad Innovative Growth ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. LCLG delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | LCLG | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.90% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $111M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 0.00% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 57 | |
| YTD Return | +14.29% | +16.14% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.79% | +22.95% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.19% | +26.70% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.28% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 19.9% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -25.8% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Logan Capital | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Aug 8, 2022 |
IVV vs LCLG Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Logan Capital Broad Innovative Growth ETF (LCLG) is a ETF from Logan Capital. Over the past year IVV returned +21.79% while LCLG returned +22.95%. Year to date, IVV is up 14.29% versus a gain of 16.14% for LCLG.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +22.19% per year against +26.70% for LCLG. Across the full 4-year window we track, LCLG has the edge at +22.42% annualized vs +7.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
LCLG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.9% 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 -25.8% for LCLG. 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 0.93. 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 LCLG charges 0.90%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $90 annually, a gap of $87 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 0.00% for LCLG.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and LCLG share 39 holdings out of 522 unique holdings combined, representing a 26.2% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or LCLG?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while LCLG charges 0.90%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $87 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or LCLG?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.79% vs +22.95% for LCLG, so LCLG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), IVV annualized +7.06% vs +22.42% for LCLG. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or LCLG?
LCLG has been the more volatile fund at 19.9% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs LCLG -25.8%.
Should I hold both IVV and LCLG?
IVV and LCLG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.93, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and LCLG?
IVV and LCLG share 39 common holdings with a 26.2% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 522 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or LCLG?
IVV yields 1.10% while LCLG 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.