IVV vs MCH
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Matthews China Active ETF
Which is better, IVV or MCH?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Value.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.4%.
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 | MCH |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.79% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $22M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 1.72% |
| Holdings | 508 | 57 |
| YTD Return | +14.15%Best | -3.25% |
| 1Y Return | +17.31%Best | -2.77% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +23.17%Best | +12.09% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.85% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.3%Best | 30.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -18.8%Best | -40.5% |
| $10,000 over 4.2 years | $21,756Best | $11,881 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.8%Best | 44.4% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Matthews Asia Funds |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jul 13, 2022 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 4.2 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 14, 2022 to Sep 21, 2026 (4.2 years).
IVV vs MCH 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 4.2 years both funds cover.
IVV vs MCH Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Matthews China Active ETF (MCH) is an ETF from Matthews Asia Funds. Over the past year IVV returned +17.31% while MCH returned -2.77%. Year to date, IVV is up 14.15% versus a loss of 3.25% for MCH.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +23.17% per year against +12.09% for MCH. Across the full 4-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +20.33% annualized vs +4.19%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MCH has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.3% compared with 14.3% 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 -40.5% for MCH. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.36. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MCH 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 1.72% for MCH.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 490 holdings in IVV and 54 in MCH, totalling 99.3% and 100.0% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 54 in MCH, against full books of 508 and 57.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 2 positions for MCH that do not appear in our book for IVV (1.0% of the fund), and 482 for IVV that do not appear in MCH (98.6%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and MCH 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 MCH?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MCH charges 0.79%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $76 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or MCH?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.31% vs -2.77% for MCH, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), IVV annualized +20.33% vs +4.19% for MCH. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or MCH?
MCH has been the more volatile fund at 30.3% annualized versus 14.3% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -18.8% vs MCH -40.5%.
Should I hold both IVV and MCH?
IVV and MCH have a monthly-return correlation of 0.36, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MCH?
IVV yields 1.06% while MCH yields 1.72%, so MCH currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is MCH better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 44.4%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.