IVV vs LQDB
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs iShares BBB Rated Corporate Bond ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. LQDB offers more diversification with 1,673 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | LQDB | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.15% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $59M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 4.77% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 1,673 | |
| YTD Return | +12.28% | -0.09% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.94% | +2.12% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.81% | +5.94% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.05% | +0.18% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 7.8% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -21.6% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Fixed Income | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | May 18, 2021 |
IVV vs LQDB Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and iShares BBB Rated Corporate Bond ETF (LQDB) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% while LQDB returned +2.12%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.28% versus a loss of 0.09% for LQDB.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.81% per year against +5.94% for LQDB; over five years the annualized figures are +13.05% and +0.18% respectively. Across the full 5-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +6.98% annualized vs +0.79%. 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 7.8% for LQDB. 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 -21.6% for LQDB. 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 0.72. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while LQDB charges 0.15%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $15 annually, a gap of $12 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 4.77% for LQDB.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and LQDB share 3 holdings out of 2006 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.3% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or LQDB?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while LQDB charges 0.15%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $12 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or LQDB?
Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% vs +2.12% for LQDB, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (5 years), IVV annualized +6.98% vs +0.79% for LQDB. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or LQDB?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 7.8% for LQDB. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs LQDB -21.6%.
Should I hold both IVV and LQDB?
IVV and LQDB have a monthly-return correlation of 0.72, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and LQDB?
IVV and LQDB share 3 common holdings with a 0.3% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 2006 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or LQDB?
IVV yields 1.10% while LQDB yields 4.77%, so LQDB 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.