IVV vs MFUT
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF
Which is better, IVV or MFUT?
Large Cap Blend against Allocation/Balanced.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over the full window, MFUT over 1Y.
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 | MFUT |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.89% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $66M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 508 | 143 |
| YTD Return | +12.39% | +21.08%Best |
| 1Y Return | +16.61% | +31.02%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.38% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.51% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 11.8%Best | 14.5% |
| Max Drawdown | -18.8%Best | -29.3% |
| $10,000 over 2.3 years | $14,914Best | $10,035 |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Cambria Investment Management |
| Category | Equity | Allocation/Balanced |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Allocation/Balanced |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | May 29, 2024 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.3 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: May 29, 2024 to Sep 18, 2026 (2.3 years).
IVV vs MFUT 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 2.3 years both funds cover.
IVV vs MFUT Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Cambria Chesapeake Pure Trend ETF (MFUT) is an ETF from Cambria Investment Management. Over the past year IVV returned +16.61% while MFUT returned +31.02%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.39% versus a gain of 21.08% for MFUT.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MFUT has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.5% compared with 11.8% 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 -18.8% for IVV and -29.3% for MFUT. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.46. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MFUT 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 1.06% against 0.00% for MFUT.
Holdings Overlap
At least 31.3% of IVV's money is in holdings MFUT also owns.
Stated as a floor: for MFUT, our book for it covers 89.7% of that fund, so a holding it does not list is one we cannot count as shared. The real figure is this or higher.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
36 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 41 in MFUT, against full books of 508 and 143.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in IVV | Weight in MFUT | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.07% | 2.23% | 5.84% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 7.02% | 1.26% | 5.76% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.69% | 0.11% | 5.58% |
| GEGeneral Electric Co. | 0.53% | 2.96% | 2.43% |
| MCKMckesson Corp. | 0.16% | 2.94% | 2.78% |
| KOCoca Cola Co. | 0.52% | 2.06% | 1.54% |
| CATCaterpillar, Inc. | 0.55% | 1.70% | 1.15% |
| MPCMarathon Petroleum Corp | 0.16% | 2.00% | 1.84% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 1.38% | 0.72% | 0.66% |
| CRWDCrowdstrike Holdings Inc | 0.35% | 1.49% | 1.14% |
31.3% of IVV is already inside MFUT.
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 MFUT?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MFUT charges 0.89%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $86 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or MFUT?
Over the past year IVV returned +16.61% vs +31.02% for MFUT, so MFUT leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), IVV annualized +18.98% vs +0.15% for MFUT. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or MFUT?
MFUT has been the more volatile fund at 14.5% annualized versus 11.8% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -18.8% vs MFUT -29.3%.
Should I hold both IVV and MFUT?
IVV and MFUT have a monthly-return correlation of 0.46, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and MFUT?
At least 31.3% of IVV's money is in holdings MFUT also owns. Our book for MFUT is partial, so the real figure is this or higher. They hold 36 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 41 in MFUT.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MFUT?
IVV yields 1.06% while MFUT yields 0.00%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is MFUT better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over the full window, MFUT over 1Y. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.