IVV vs MCHI
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs iShares MSCI China ETF
Which is better, IVV or MCHI?
IVV has been ahead.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 41.3%.
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 | MCHI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.59% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $6.3B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 2.00% |
| Holdings | 508 | 583 |
| YTD Return | +14.15%Best | -12.66% |
| 1Y Return | +17.31%Best | -14.60% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +23.17%Best | +9.44% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.85%Best | -2.24% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.2%Best | 23.4% |
| Max Drawdown | -33.9%Best | -63.0% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $19,128Best | $8,929 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.8%Best | 41.3% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Mar 29, 2011 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Mar 31, 2011 to Sep 21, 2026 (15.5 years).
IVV vs MCHI 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 15.5 years both funds cover.
IVV vs MCHI Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and iShares MSCI China ETF (MCHI) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year IVV returned +17.31% while MCHI returned -14.60%. Year to date, IVV is up 14.15% versus a loss of 12.66% for MCHI.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +23.17% per year against +9.44% for MCHI; over five years the annualized figures are +13.85% and -2.24% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +12.66% annualized vs +0.92%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MCHI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 23.4% compared with 14.2% 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 -33.9% for IVV and -63.0% for MCHI. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.41. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MCHI charges 0.59%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $59 annually, a gap of $56 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 2.00% for MCHI.
Holdings Overlap
0.1% of IVV's money is in holdings MCHI also owns. 0.1% of MCHI's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
We cannot see either book well enough to say how much of this pair is duplicated.
1 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 533 in MCHI, against full books of 508 and 583.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 2 positions for MCHI that do not appear in our book for IVV (0.2% of the fund), and 481 for IVV that do not appear in MCHI (98.5%).
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.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in IVV | Weight in MCHI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| XTSLABlackrock Cash Funds: Treasury, Sl Agency Shares | 0.15% | 0.06% | 0.09% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and MCHI 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 MCHI?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MCHI charges 0.59%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $56 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or MCHI?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.31% vs -14.60% for MCHI, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), IVV annualized +12.66% vs +0.92% for MCHI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or MCHI?
MCHI has been the more volatile fund at 23.4% annualized versus 14.2% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -33.9% vs MCHI -63.0%.
Should I hold both IVV and MCHI?
IVV and MCHI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.41, 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 MCHI?
IVV yields 1.06% while MCHI yields 2.00%, so MCHI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is MCHI better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 41.3%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.