IVV vs MEME
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Roundhill Meme Stock ETF
Which is better, IVV or MEME?
IVV has been ahead.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 66.2%.
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 | MEME |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.69% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $14M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 508 | 20 |
| YTD Return | +12.39% | +22.59%Best |
| 1Y Return | +16.61%Best | -15.94% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.38% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.51% | - |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.8%Best | 66.2% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Roundhill Investments |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Oct 8, 2025 |
Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.
IVV vs MEME 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
IVV vs MEME Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Roundhill Meme Stock ETF (MEME) is an ETF from Roundhill Investments. Over the past year IVV returned +16.61% while MEME returned -15.94%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.39% versus a gain of 22.59% for MEME.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MEME charges 0.69%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $69 annually, a gap of $66 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 0.00% for MEME.
Holdings Overlap
0.6% of IVV's money is in holdings MEME also owns. 33.6% of MEME's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
5 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 20 in MEME, against full books of 508 and 20.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 12 positions for MEME that do not appear in our book for IVV (55.5% of the fund), and 477 for IVV that do not appear in MEME (98.0%).
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.
33.6% of MEME is already inside IVV.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or MEME?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MEME charges 0.69%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $66 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or MEME?
Over the past year IVV returned +16.61% vs -15.94% for MEME, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and MEME?
33.6% of MEME's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 33.6% of MEME's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 5 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 20 in MEME.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MEME?
IVV yields 1.06% while MEME yields 0.00%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is MEME better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 66.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.