IVV vs MLCC
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Global X MLCC & Electronic Components ETF
Which is better, IVV or MLCC?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV is less concentrated, with 38.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 91.2%.
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 | MLCC |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.75% |
| AUM | $896.5B | $5M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 508 | 15 |
| YTD Return | +12.65%Best | -8.01% |
| 1Y Return | +16.83% | - |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.09% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.87% | - |
| Top 10 Weight | 38.9%Best | 91.2% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Global X by mirae Asset |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Sep 10, 2026 |
Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.
IVV vs MLCC 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
IVV vs MLCC Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Global X MLCC & Electronic Components ETF (MLCC) is an ETF from Global X by mirae Asset. Year to date, IVV is up 12.65% versus a loss of 8.01% for MLCC.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MLCC charges 0.75%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $75 annually, a gap of $72 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 0.00% for MLCC.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 506 holdings in IVV and 15 in MLCC, totalling 99.9% and 99.9% 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 506 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 15 in MLCC, against full books of 508 and 15.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 0 positions for MLCC that do not appear in our book for IVV (0.0% of the fund), and 500 for IVV that do not appear in MLCC (99.4%).
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 MLCC 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 MLCC?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MLCC charges 0.75%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $72 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MLCC?
IVV yields 1.10% while MLCC yields 0.00%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is MLCC better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV is less concentrated, with 38.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 91.2%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.