IVV vs MMD
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs NYLIM MacKay DefinedTerm Muni Opportunities Fund
Which is better, IVV or MMD?
Large Cap Blend against Municipal Bond.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. MMD is less concentrated, with 35.5% 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 | MMD |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 2.33% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $478M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 4.82% |
| Holdings | 508 | 93 |
| YTD Return | +12.39%Best | -1.96% |
| 1Y Return | +16.61%Best | -3.99% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.38%Best | +0.42% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.51%Best | -4.25% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.1% | 11.3%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -33.9% | -30.1%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,844Best | $8,048 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.8% | 35.5%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | New York Life Investments |
| Category | Equity | Tax Preferred |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Municipal Bond |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jun 27, 2012 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 27, 2012 to Sep 18, 2026 (14.2 years).
IVV vs MMD 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 MMD Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and NYLIM MacKay DefinedTerm Muni Opportunities Fund (MMD) is an ETF from New York Life Investments. Over the past year IVV returned +16.61% while MMD returned -3.99%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.39% versus a loss of 1.96% for MMD.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.38% per year against +0.42% for MMD; over five years the annualized figures are +13.51% and -4.25% respectively. Across the full 14-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +13.68% annualized vs -0.48%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.1% compared with 11.3% for MMD. 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 -30.1% for MMD. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.43. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MMD charges 2.33%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $233 annually, a gap of $230 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 4.82% for MMD.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 490 holdings in IVV and 51 in MMD, totalling 99.3% and 96.9% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
The two holdings books were reported 92 days apart, IVV as of Aug 31, 2026 and MMD as of May 31, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
0 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 51 in MMD, against full books of 508 and 93.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 51 positions for MMD that do not appear in our book for IVV (96.9% of the fund), and 482 for IVV that do not appear in MMD (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 MMD 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 MMD?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MMD charges 2.33%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $230 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or MMD?
Over the past year IVV returned +16.61% vs -3.99% for MMD, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (14 years), IVV annualized +13.68% vs -0.48% for MMD. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or MMD?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 14.1% annualized versus 11.3% for MMD. Worst drawdown: IVV -33.9% vs MMD -30.1%.
Should I hold both IVV and MMD?
IVV and MMD have a monthly-return correlation of 0.43, 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 MMD?
IVV yields 1.06% while MMD yields 4.82%, so MMD currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is MMD better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. MMD is less concentrated, with 35.5% 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.