IVV vs MN
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Corgi MANGOS ETF
Which is better, IVV or MN?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window, MN over 5Y.
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 | MN |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.20% |
| AUM | $879.1B | $59M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 509 | 4 |
| YTD Return | +11.33%Best | -20.03% |
| 1Y Return | +13.50%Best | -20.03% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.45% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.61% | +17.45%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.9%Best | 70.2% |
| Max Drawdown | -33.9%Best | -92.2% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,319 | $22,349Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Corgi Strategies, LLC |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Oct 2, 2026 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 18, 2011 to Nov 13, 2026 (15 years).
IVV vs MN 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 15 years both funds cover.
IVV vs MN Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Corgi MANGOS ETF (MN) is an ETF from Corgi Strategies, LLC. Over the past year IVV returned +13.50% while MN returned -20.03%. Year to date, IVV is up 11.33% versus a loss of 20.03% for MN.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MN has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 70.2% compared with 13.9% 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 -92.2% for MN. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.35. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MN charges 0.20%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $20 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 0.00% for MN.
Holdings Overlap
At least 12.2% of IVV's money is in holdings MN also owns.
Stated as a floor: for MN, our book for it covers 44.7% of that fund, so a holding it does not list is one we cannot count as shared. The real figure is this or higher.
IVV and MN share little of their money.
3 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 4 in MN, against full books of 509 and 4.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and MN 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 MN?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MN charges 0.20%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $17 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or MN?
Over the past year IVV returned +13.50% vs -20.03% for MN, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (15 years), IVV annualized +13.54% vs +7.40% for MN. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or MN?
MN has been the more volatile fund at 70.2% annualized versus 13.9% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -33.9% vs MN -92.2%.
Should I hold both IVV and MN?
IVV and MN have a monthly-return correlation of 0.35, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and MN?
At least 12.2% of IVV's money is in holdings MN also owns. Our book for MN is partial, so the real figure is this or higher. They hold 3 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 4 in MN.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MN?
IVV yields 1.09% while MN yields 0.00%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is MN better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window, MN over 5Y. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.