IVV vs LIT
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. LIT delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | LIT | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.75% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $1.6B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 0.72% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 45 | |
| YTD Return | +14.29% | +14.01% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.79% | +67.09% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.19% | +9.82% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.28% | -0.89% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 28.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -65.9% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Global X by mirae Asset | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jul 22, 2010 |
IVV vs LIT Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT) is a ETF from Global X by mirae Asset. Over the past year IVV returned +21.79% while LIT returned +67.09%. Year to date, IVV is up 14.29% versus a gain of 14.01% for LIT.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +22.19% per year against +9.82% for LIT; over five years the annualized figures are +13.28% and -0.89% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.06% annualized vs +5.71%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
LIT has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 28.3% 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 -65.9% for LIT. 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 0.64. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while LIT charges 0.75%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $75 annually, a gap of $72 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 0.72% for LIT.
Holdings Overlap
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or LIT?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while LIT charges 0.75%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $72 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or LIT?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.79% vs +67.09% for LIT, so LIT leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), IVV annualized +7.06% vs +5.71% for LIT. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or LIT?
LIT has been the more volatile fund at 28.3% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs LIT -65.9%.
Should I hold both IVV and LIT?
IVV and LIT have a monthly-return correlation of 0.64, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and LIT?
IVV and LIT share 2 common holdings with a 1.7% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 542 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or LIT?
IVV yields 1.10% while LIT yields 0.72%, 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.