IVV vs MFM
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs MFS Municipal Income Trust
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | MFM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 1.45% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $250M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 5.25% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 840 | |
| YTD Return | +13.72% | +4.12% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.64% | +11.47% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.55% | +7.24% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.27% | -1.23% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 14.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -64.8% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | MFS Investment Management | |
| Category | Equity | Tax Preferred | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Nov 25, 1986 |
IVV vs MFM Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and MFS Municipal Income Trust (MFM) is a ETF from MFS Investment Management. Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% while MFM returned +11.47%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.72% versus a gain of 4.12% for MFM.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.55% per year against +7.24% for MFM; over five years the annualized figures are +13.27% and -1.23% respectively. Across the full 26-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.04% annualized vs -1.05%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 14.1% for MFM. 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 -64.8% for MFM. 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 0.30. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MFM charges 1.45%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $145 annually, a gap of $142 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 5.25% for MFM.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and MFM share 0 holdings out of 768 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 MFM?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MFM charges 1.45%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $142 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or MFM?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% vs +11.47% for MFM, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (26 years), IVV annualized +7.04% vs -1.05% for MFM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or MFM?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 14.1% for MFM. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs MFM -64.8%.
Should I hold both IVV and MFM?
IVV and MFM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.30, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and MFM?
IVV and MFM share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 768 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MFM?
IVV yields 1.09% while MFM yields 5.25%, so MFM 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.