IVV vs MTBA
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Simplify MBS ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | MTBA | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.15% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $1.5B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 5.57% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 8 | |
| YTD Return | +13.80% | -0.33% | |
| 1Y Return | +23.01% | +2.33% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.77% | - | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.39% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 3.8% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -3.5% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Simplify Exchange Traded Funds | |
| Category | Equity | Fixed Income | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Nov 6, 2023 |
IVV vs MTBA Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Simplify MBS ETF (MTBA) is a ETF from Simplify Exchange Traded Funds. Over the past year IVV returned +23.01% while MTBA returned +2.33%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.80% versus a loss of 0.33% for MTBA.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 3.8% for MTBA. 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 -3.5% for MTBA. Drawdown depth is worth weighing if you expect to sell during market stress rather than ride it out.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.40. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MTBA charges 0.15%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $15 annually, a gap of $12 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 5.57% for MTBA.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and MTBA share 0 holdings out of 514 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or MTBA?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MTBA charges 0.15%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $12 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or MTBA?
Over the past year IVV returned +23.01% vs +2.33% for MTBA, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (3 years), IVV annualized +7.04% vs +4.52% for MTBA. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or MTBA?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 3.8% for MTBA. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs MTBA -3.5%.
Should I hold both IVV and MTBA?
IVV and MTBA have a monthly-return correlation of 0.40, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and MTBA?
IVV and MTBA share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 514 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MTBA?
IVV yields 1.09% while MTBA yields 5.57%, so MTBA currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Popular ETF Comparisons
Get Full ETF Analytics
Access complete holdings data, overlap analysis, screener tools, and more with FundXLS.