IVV vs MGMT
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF
Which is better, IVV or MGMT?
Large Cap Blend against Mid Cap Growth.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. MGMT is less concentrated, with 30.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%.
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 | MGMT |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 1.10% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $171M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 0.30% |
| Holdings | 508 | 57 |
| YTD Return | +13.85%Best | +10.24% |
| 1Y Return | +18.57%Best | +12.57% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +23.50%Best | +13.83% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.34%Best | +6.70% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1%Best | 18.1% |
| Max Drawdown | -24.5%Best | -24.9% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,703Best | $13,830 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.8% | 30.1%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Ballast Asset Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Mid Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Dec 2, 2020 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 3, 2020 to Sep 25, 2026 (5.8 years).
IVV vs MGMT 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 5.8 years both funds cover.
IVV vs MGMT Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Ballast Small/Mid Cap ETF (MGMT) is an ETF from Ballast Asset Management. Over the past year IVV returned +18.57% while MGMT returned +12.57%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.85% versus a gain of 10.24% for MGMT.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +23.50% per year against +13.83% for MGMT; over five years the annualized figures are +13.34% and +6.70% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +15.24% annualized vs +12.66%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MGMT has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.1% 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 -24.5% for IVV and -24.9% for MGMT. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
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 MGMT charges 1.10%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $110 annually, a gap of $107 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 0.30% for MGMT.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 490 holdings in IVV and 54 in MGMT, totalling 99.3% and 99.0% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 54 in MGMT, against full books of 508 and 57.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 50 positions for MGMT that do not appear in our book for IVV (92.4% of the fund), and 482 for IVV that do not appear in MGMT (98.6%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and MGMT you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or MGMT?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MGMT charges 1.10%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $107 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or MGMT?
Over the past year IVV returned +18.57% vs +12.57% for MGMT, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), IVV annualized +15.24% vs +12.66% for MGMT. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or MGMT?
MGMT has been the more volatile fund at 18.1% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -24.5% vs MGMT -24.9%.
Should I hold both IVV and MGMT?
IVV and MGMT have a monthly-return correlation of 0.73, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MGMT?
IVV yields 1.06% while MGMT yields 0.30%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is MGMT better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. MGMT is less concentrated, with 30.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.