IVV vs MLN
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs VanEck Long Muni ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | MLN | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.24% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $691M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 3.66% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 682 | |
| YTD Return | +13.43% | -0.45% | |
| 1Y Return | +22.61% | +5.38% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.47% | +2.77% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.26% | -1.59% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 42.0% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -62.4% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | VanEck | |
| Category | Equity | Tax Preferred | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jan 2, 2008 |
IVV vs MLN Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and VanEck Long Muni ETF (MLN) is a ETF from VanEck. Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% while MLN returned +5.38%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.43% versus a loss of 0.45% for MLN.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.47% per year against +2.77% for MLN; over five years the annualized figures are +13.26% and -1.59% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.03% annualized vs +2.84%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MLN has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 42.0% 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 -62.4% for MLN. 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 0.07. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MLN charges 0.24%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $24 annually, a gap of $21 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 3.66% for MLN.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and MLN share 0 holdings out of 868 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or MLN?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MLN charges 0.24%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $21 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or MLN?
Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% vs +5.38% for MLN, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), IVV annualized +7.03% vs +2.84% for MLN. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or MLN?
MLN has been the more volatile fund at 42.0% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs MLN -62.4%.
Should I hold both IVV and MLN?
IVV and MLN have a monthly-return correlation of 0.07, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and MLN?
IVV and MLN share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 868 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MLN?
IVV yields 1.09% while MLN yields 3.66%, so MLN 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.