IVV vs LRNZ
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. LRNZ delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | LRNZ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.68% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $43M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 0.00% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 26 | |
| YTD Return | +12.28% | +31.85% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.94% | +49.88% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.81% | +27.83% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.05% | +6.61% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 33.5% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -61.3% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | TrueShares | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Feb 28, 2020 |
IVV vs LRNZ Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and TrueShares Technology, AI & Deep Learning ETF (LRNZ) is a ETF from TrueShares. Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% while LRNZ returned +49.88%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.28% versus a gain of 31.85% for LRNZ.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.81% per year against +27.83% for LRNZ; over five years the annualized figures are +13.05% and +6.61% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, LRNZ has the edge at +14.86% annualized vs +6.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
LRNZ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 33.5% 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 -61.3% for LRNZ. 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 0.63. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while LRNZ charges 0.68%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $68 annually, a gap of $65 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 0.00% for LRNZ.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and LRNZ share 13 holdings out of 518 unique holdings combined, representing a 16.2% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or LRNZ?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while LRNZ charges 0.68%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $65 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or LRNZ?
Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% vs +49.88% for LRNZ, so LRNZ leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), IVV annualized +6.98% vs +14.86% for LRNZ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or LRNZ?
LRNZ has been the more volatile fund at 33.5% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs LRNZ -61.3%.
Should I hold both IVV and LRNZ?
IVV and LRNZ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.63, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and LRNZ?
IVV and LRNZ share 13 common holdings with a 16.2% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 518 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or LRNZ?
IVV yields 1.10% while LRNZ 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.