IVV vs MFEM
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Markets Equity ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. MFEM delivered stronger 1-year returns. MFEM offers more diversification with 701 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | MFEM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.49% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $156M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 2.39% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 701 | |
| YTD Return | +12.71% | +21.80% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.89% | +33.81% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.08% | +20.43% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.96% | +8.97% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 17.7% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -45.3% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | PIMCO (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Aug 31, 2017 |
IVV vs MFEM Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and PIMCO RAFI Dynamic Multi-Factor Emerging Markets Equity ETF (MFEM) is a ETF from PIMCO (US). Over the past year IVV returned +21.89% while MFEM returned +33.81%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.71% versus a gain of 21.80% for MFEM.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +22.08% per year against +20.43% for MFEM; over five years the annualized figures are +12.96% and +8.97% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.00% annualized vs +6.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MFEM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.7% 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 -45.3% for MFEM. 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 0.73. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MFEM charges 0.49%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $49 annually, a gap of $46 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 2.39% for MFEM.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and MFEM share 0 holdings out of 1008 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 MFEM?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MFEM charges 0.49%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $46 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or MFEM?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.89% vs +33.81% for MFEM, so MFEM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), IVV annualized +7.00% vs +6.84% for MFEM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or MFEM?
MFEM has been the more volatile fund at 17.7% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs MFEM -45.3%.
Should I hold both IVV and MFEM?
IVV and MFEM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.73, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and MFEM?
IVV and MFEM share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 1008 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MFEM?
IVV yields 1.10% while MFEM yields 2.39%, so MFEM 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.