IVV vs MILN
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Global X Millennial Consumer ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | MILN | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.50% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $104M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 0.31% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 83 | |
| YTD Return | +12.28% | -0.66% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.94% | -5.50% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.81% | +14.59% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.05% | +1.49% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 20.2% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -44.4% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Global X by mirae Asset | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | May 4, 2016 |
IVV vs MILN Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Global X Millennial Consumer ETF (MILN) is a ETF from Global X by mirae Asset. Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% while MILN returned -5.50%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.28% versus a loss of 0.66% for MILN.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.81% per year against +14.59% for MILN; over five years the annualized figures are +13.05% and +1.49% respectively. Across the full 10-year window we track, MILN has the edge at +11.81% annualized vs +6.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MILN has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.2% 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 -44.4% for MILN. 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 0.89. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MILN charges 0.50%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $50 annually, a gap of $47 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 0.31% for MILN.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and MILN share 31 holdings out of 555 unique holdings combined, representing a 15.9% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or MILN?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MILN charges 0.50%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $47 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or MILN?
Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% vs -5.50% for MILN, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (10 years), IVV annualized +6.98% vs +11.81% for MILN. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or MILN?
MILN has been the more volatile fund at 20.2% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs MILN -44.4%.
Should I hold both IVV and MILN?
IVV and MILN have a monthly-return correlation of 0.89, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and MILN?
IVV and MILN share 31 common holdings with a 15.9% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 555 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MILN?
IVV yields 1.10% while MILN yields 0.31%, so IVV 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.