IVV vs MCHS
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Matthews China Discovery Active ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. MCHS delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | MCHS | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.89% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $20M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 1.56% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 55 | |
| YTD Return | +13.72% | +28.01% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.64% | +37.93% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.55% | - | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.27% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 29.8% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -24.8% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Matthews Asia Funds | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jan 10, 2024 |
IVV vs MCHS Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) is a ETF from Matthews Asia Funds. Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% while MCHS returned +37.93%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.72% versus a gain of 28.01% for MCHS.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MCHS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 29.8% 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 -24.8% for MCHS. 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 0.32. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MCHS charges 0.89%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $89 annually, a gap of $86 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 1.56% for MCHS.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and MCHS share 0 holdings out of 556 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 MCHS?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MCHS charges 0.89%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $86 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or MCHS?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% vs +37.93% for MCHS, so MCHS leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (3 years), IVV annualized +7.04% vs +28.47% for MCHS. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or MCHS?
MCHS has been the more volatile fund at 29.8% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs MCHS -24.8%.
Should I hold both IVV and MCHS?
IVV and MCHS have a monthly-return correlation of 0.32, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and MCHS?
IVV and MCHS share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 556 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MCHS?
IVV yields 1.09% while MCHS yields 1.56%, so MCHS 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.