IVV vs MMTM
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs State Street SPDR S&P 1500 Momentum Tilt ETF
Which is better, IVV or MMTM?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 40.6%.
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 | MMTM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.12% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $160M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 0.89% |
| Holdings | 508 | 1,472 |
| YTD Return | +12.51%Best | +4.68% |
| 1Y Return | +17.57%Best | +8.85% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.27%Best | +18.82% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.95%Best | +11.30% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.2%Best | 14.4% |
| Max Drawdown | -33.9%Best | -34.2% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,384Best | $17,080 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.9%Best | 40.6% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | State Street Investment Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Oct 24, 2012 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 25, 2012 to Sep 11, 2026 (13.9 years).
IVV vs MMTM 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 13.9 years both funds cover.
IVV vs MMTM Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and State Street SPDR S&P 1500 Momentum Tilt ETF (MMTM) is an ETF from State Street Investment Management. Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% while MMTM returned +8.85%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.51% versus a gain of 4.68% for MMTM.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.27% per year against +18.82% for MMTM; over five years the annualized figures are +12.95% and +11.30% respectively. Across the full 14-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +13.56% annualized vs +12.94%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MMTM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.4% compared with 14.2% 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 -34.2% for MMTM. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.96. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MMTM charges 0.12%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $12 annually, a gap of $9 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 0.89% for MMTM.
Holdings Overlap
98.1% of IVV's money is in holdings MMTM also owns. 89.9% of MMTM's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
Most of IVV is already inside MMTM. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
491 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 1,467 in MMTM, against full books of 508 and 1,472.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 367 positions for MMTM that do not appear in our book for IVV (7.7% of the fund), and 9 for IVV that do not appear in MMTM (1.5%).
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.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in IVV | Weight in MMTM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp. | 7.98% | 10.00% | 2.02% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 6.86% | 5.94% | 0.92% |
| GOOGLAlphabet A Usd 0.001 | 3.19% | 5.41% | 2.22% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.98% | 3.98% | 1.00% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp 4.100 Feb 06 37 | 5.44% | 1.37% | 4.07% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc | 2.56% | 4.11% | 1.55% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.01% | 2.44% | 1.57% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.51% | 2.95% | 1.44% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc. | 1.18% | 2.27% | 1.09% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 1.36% | 2.01% | 0.65% |
98.1% of IVV is already inside MMTM.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or MMTM?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MMTM charges 0.12%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $9 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or MMTM?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% vs +8.85% for MMTM, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (14 years), IVV annualized +13.56% vs +12.94% for MMTM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or MMTM?
MMTM has been the more volatile fund at 14.4% annualized versus 14.2% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -33.9% vs MMTM -34.2%.
Should I hold both IVV and MMTM?
IVV and MMTM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.96, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and MMTM?
98.1% of IVV's money is in holdings MMTM also owns. 89.9% of MMTM's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 491 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 1,467 in MMTM.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MMTM?
IVV yields 1.06% while MMTM yields 0.89%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is MMTM better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.96. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 40.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.