IVV vs MGC
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Vanguard Mega Cap ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. MGC delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | MGC | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.05% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $10.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 1.15% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 176 | |
| YTD Return | +13.43% | +12.98% | |
| 1Y Return | +22.61% | +22.66% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.47% | +22.72% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.26% | +13.82% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 15.7% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -53.0% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Vanguard (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Dec 17, 2007 |
IVV vs MGC Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Vanguard Mega Cap ETF (MGC) is a ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% while MGC returned +22.66%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.43% versus a gain of 12.98% for MGC.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.47% per year against +22.72% for MGC; over five years the annualized figures are +13.26% and +13.82% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, MGC has the edge at +10.07% annualized vs +7.03%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MGC has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.7% 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 -53.0% for MGC. 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 0.99. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MGC charges 0.05%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $5 annually, a gap of $2 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 1.15% for MGC.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and MGC share 166 holdings out of 512 unique holdings combined, representing a 78.3% weight overlap.
High overlap means holding both may not provide much additional diversification.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or MGC?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MGC charges 0.05%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $2 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or MGC?
Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% vs +22.66% for MGC, so MGC leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), IVV annualized +7.03% vs +10.07% for MGC. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or MGC?
MGC has been the more volatile fund at 15.7% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs MGC -53.0%.
Should I hold both IVV and MGC?
IVV and MGC have a monthly-return correlation of 0.99, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and MGC?
IVV and MGC share 166 common holdings with a 78.3% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 512 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MGC?
IVV yields 1.09% while MGC yields 1.15%, so MGC 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.