IVV vs MMT
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs MFS Multimarket Income Trust
Which is better, IVV or MMT?
Large Cap Blend against Diversified Sectoral Bond.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y 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 | MMT |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 1.17% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $266M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 8.69% |
| Holdings | 508 | 920 |
| YTD Return | +12.51%Best | -0.97% |
| 1Y Return | +17.57%Best | -1.70% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.27%Best | +8.61% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.95%Best | +0.08% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 10.4%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -47.5%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,384Best | $10,040 |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | MFS Investment Management |
| Category | Equity | Fixed Income |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Diversified Sectoral Bond |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Mar 12, 1987 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: May 19, 2000 to Sep 11, 2026 (26.3 years).
IVV vs MMT 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 MMT Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and MFS Multimarket Income Trust (MMT) is an ETF from MFS Investment Management. Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% while MMT returned -1.70%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.51% versus a loss of 0.97% for MMT.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.27% per year against +8.61% for MMT; over five years the annualized figures are +12.95% and +0.08% respectively. Across the full 26-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +6.97% annualized vs +0.75%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 10.4% for MMT. 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 -47.5% for MMT. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.56. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MMT charges 1.17%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $117 annually, a gap of $114 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 8.69% for MMT.
Holdings Overlap
At least 0.1% of IVV's money is in holdings MMT also owns.
Stated as a floor: for MMT, our book for it covers 88.0% of that fund, so a holding it does not list is one we cannot count as shared. The real figure is this or higher.
We cannot see either book well enough to say how much of this pair is duplicated.
The two holdings books were reported 186 days apart, IVV as of Aug 5, 2026 and MMT as of Jan 31, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
1 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 547 in MMT, against full books of 508 and 920.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in IVV | Weight in MMT | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| TMUST-Mobile Usa Inc Esrw Usd Npv Ref Sm#585558 | 0.12% | 0.04% | 0.08% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and MMT 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 MMT?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MMT charges 1.17%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $114 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or MMT?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% vs -1.70% for MMT, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (26 years), IVV annualized +6.97% vs +0.75% for MMT. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or MMT?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 10.4% for MMT. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs MMT -47.5%.
Should I hold both IVV and MMT?
IVV and MMT have a monthly-return correlation of 0.56, 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 MMT?
IVV yields 1.06% while MMT yields 8.69%, so MMT currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is MMT better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.