IVV vs MLPI
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF
Which is better, IVV or MLPI?
Large Cap Blend against Option Writing.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window.
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 | MLPI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.68% |
| AUM | $850.0B | $872M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 13.31% |
| Holdings | 1,018 | 59 |
| YTD Return | +11.09%Best | -0.58% |
| 1Y Return | +11.71%Best | +0.81% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.10% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.55% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.4%Best | 110.2% |
| Max Drawdown | -33.9%Best | -81.4% |
| $10,000 over 16.6 years | $69,208Best | $34,899 |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | NEOS |
| Category | Equity | Alternative |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Option Writing |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Dec 18, 2025 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 16.6 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Apr 1, 2010 to Nov 9, 2026 (16.6 years).
IVV vs MLPI 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 16.6 years both funds cover.
IVV vs MLPI Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and NEOS MLP & Energy Infrastructure High Income ETF (MLPI) is an ETF from NEOS. Over the past year IVV returned +11.71% while MLPI returned +0.81%. Year to date, IVV is up 11.09% versus a loss of 0.58% for MLPI.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MLPI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 110.2% compared with 14.4% 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 -33.9% for IVV and -81.4% for MLPI. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.13. They move largely independently of each other.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MLPI charges 0.68%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $68 annually, a gap of $65 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 13.31% for MLPI.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and MLPI 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 MLPI?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MLPI charges 0.68%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $65 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or MLPI?
Over the past year IVV returned +11.71% vs +0.81% for MLPI, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (17 years), IVV annualized +12.36% vs +7.82% for MLPI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or MLPI?
MLPI has been the more volatile fund at 110.2% annualized versus 14.4% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -33.9% vs MLPI -81.4%.
Should I hold both IVV and MLPI?
IVV and MLPI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.13, 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 MLPI?
IVV yields 1.09% while MLPI yields 13.31%, so MLPI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is MLPI better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.