IVV vs LENS
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Sarmaya Thematic ETF
Which is better, IVV or LENS?
Large Cap Blend against Mid Cap Value.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. LENS led over 1Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.0%.
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 | LENS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.79% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $66M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 1.53% |
| Holdings | 508 | 45 |
| YTD Return | +11.57% | +19.87%Best |
| 1Y Return | +17.57% | +46.82%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.71% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.80% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.0%Best | 26.5% |
| Max Drawdown | -18.8%Best | -24.6% |
| $10,000 over 1.6 years | $12,794 | $18,430Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.9%Best | 44.0% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Sarmaya Partners |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Mid Cap Value |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jan 28, 2025 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.6 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jan 29, 2025 to Sep 10, 2026 (1.6 years).
IVV vs LENS 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 1.6 years both funds cover.
IVV vs LENS Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Sarmaya Thematic ETF (LENS) is an ETF from Sarmaya Partners. Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% while LENS returned +46.82%. Year to date, IVV is up 11.57% versus a gain of 19.87% for LENS.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
LENS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 26.5% compared with 13.0% 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 -18.8% for IVV and -24.6% for LENS. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.11. They move largely independently of each other.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while LENS charges 0.79%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $79 annually, a gap of $76 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 1.53% for LENS.
Holdings Overlap
1.9% of IVV's money is in holdings LENS also owns. 19.9% of LENS's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
LENS and IVV share little of their money.
8 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 45 in LENS, against full books of 508 and 45.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 18 positions for LENS that do not appear in our book for IVV (47.4% of the fund), and 488 for IVV that do not appear in LENS (97.5%).
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 LENS | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| XOMExxon Mobil Corp. | 0.94% | 4.64% | 3.70% |
| CVXChevron Corp. | 0.52% | 4.59% | 4.07% |
| PSXPhillips 66 | 0.12% | 2.36% | 2.24% |
| SLBSchlumberger Nv. | 0.11% | 2.30% | 2.19% |
| DVNDevon Energy Corp. | 0.07% | 2.12% | 2.05% |
| BKRBaker Hughes A Ge Co. Class A | 0.09% | 1.65% | 1.56% |
| CFCf Industries Holdings Inc. | 0.03% | 1.14% | 1.11% |
| HAL:MBHindustan Aeronautics Ltd | 0.04% | 1.09% | 1.05% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and LENS 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 LENS?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while LENS charges 0.79%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $76 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or LENS?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% vs +46.82% for LENS, so LENS leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), IVV annualized +16.65% vs +46.54% for LENS. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or LENS?
LENS has been the more volatile fund at 26.5% annualized versus 13.0% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -18.8% vs LENS -24.6%.
Should I hold both IVV and LENS?
IVV and LENS have a monthly-return correlation of 0.11, 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 LENS?
19.9% of LENS's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 19.9% of LENS's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 8 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 45 in LENS.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or LENS?
IVV yields 1.06% while LENS yields 1.53%, so LENS currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is LENS better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. LENS led over 1Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.