IVV vs MOAT
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF
Which is better, IVV or MOAT?
Each has led over a different period.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y and 5Y, MOAT over the full window. MOAT is less concentrated, with 27.1% 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 | MOAT |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.46% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $11.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 1.23% |
| Holdings | 508 | 56 |
| YTD Return | +12.01%Best | +6.18% |
| 1Y Return | +16.48%Best | +12.73% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.21%Best | +12.73% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.95%Best | +8.98% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.6%Best | 154208.1% |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5%Best | -96.0% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,384Best | $15,372 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.8% | 27.1%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | VanEck |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Apr 24, 2012 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 29, 2007 to Sep 14, 2026 (19 years).
IVV vs MOAT 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 MOAT Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF (MOAT) is an ETF from VanEck. Over the past year IVV returned +16.48% while MOAT returned +12.73%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.01% versus a gain of 6.18% for MOAT.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.21% per year against +12.73% for MOAT; over five years the annualized figures are +12.95% and +8.98% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, MOAT has the edge at +51.91% annualized vs +9.49%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MOAT has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 154208.1% compared with 15.6% 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 -56.5% for IVV and -96.0% for MOAT. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at -0.02. They move largely independently of each other.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MOAT charges 0.46%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $46 annually, a gap of $43 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 1.23% for MOAT.
Holdings Overlap
27.0% of IVV's money is in holdings MOAT also owns. 85.2% of MOAT's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
Most of MOAT is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
46 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 55 in MOAT, against full books of 508 and 56.
What only one of them owns
Measured across the 490 and 55 positions we hold weights for.
IVV holds 436 positions MOAT does not, 71.6% of the fund.
Largest: AAPL 7.02%, GOOGL 3.00%, GOOG 2.39%, MU 1.63%, TSLA 1.56%
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in IVV | Weight in MOAT | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.07% | 2.46% | 5.61% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.69% | 2.73% | 2.96% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.84% | 1.32% | 2.52% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.65% | 2.19% | 0.46% |
| VEEVVeeva Systems Inc | 0.06% | 3.49% | 3.43% |
| ABNBAirbnb Inc | 0.12% | 3.01% | 2.89% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 1.90% | 1.11% | 0.79% |
| PANWPalo Alto Networks, Inc | 0.47% | 2.46% | 1.99% |
| SCHWSchwab Strategic T | 0.27% | 2.65% | 2.38% |
| BMYBristol-Myers Squibb Co. | 0.21% | 2.60% | 2.39% |
85.2% of MOAT is already inside IVV.
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 MOAT?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MOAT charges 0.46%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $43 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or MOAT?
Over the past year IVV returned +16.48% vs +12.73% for MOAT, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), IVV annualized +9.49% vs +51.91% for MOAT. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or MOAT?
MOAT has been the more volatile fund at 154208.1% annualized versus 15.6% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs MOAT -96.0%.
Should I hold both IVV and MOAT?
IVV and MOAT have a monthly-return correlation of -0.02, 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 MOAT?
85.2% of MOAT's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 85.2% of MOAT's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 46 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 55 in MOAT.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MOAT?
IVV yields 1.06% while MOAT yields 1.23%, so MOAT currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is MOAT better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y and 5Y, MOAT over the full window. MOAT is less concentrated, with 27.1% 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.