IVV vs LONZ
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs PIMCO Senior Loan Active Exchange-Traded Fund
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | LONZ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.63% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $580M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 8.73% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 307 | |
| YTD Return | +13.72% | +2.21% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.64% | +5.22% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.55% | +7.48% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.27% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 3.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -4.2% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | PIMCO (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Alternative | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jun 8, 2022 |
IVV vs LONZ Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and PIMCO Senior Loan Active Exchange-Traded Fund (LONZ) is a ETF from PIMCO (US). Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% while LONZ returned +5.22%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.72% versus a gain of 2.21% for LONZ.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.55% per year against +7.48% for LONZ. Across the full 4-year window we track, LONZ has the edge at +7.43% annualized vs +7.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 3.1% for LONZ. 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 -4.2% for LONZ. 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 LONZ charges 0.63%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $63 annually, a gap of $60 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 8.73% for LONZ.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and LONZ share 0 holdings out of 643 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 LONZ?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while LONZ charges 0.63%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $60 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or LONZ?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% vs +5.22% for LONZ, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), IVV annualized +7.04% vs +7.43% for LONZ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or LONZ?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 3.1% for LONZ. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs LONZ -4.2%.
Should I hold both IVV and LONZ?
IVV and LONZ 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 LONZ?
IVV and LONZ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 643 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or LONZ?
IVV yields 1.09% while LONZ yields 8.73%, so LONZ 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.