IVV vs MTUM
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. MTUM delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | MTUM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.15% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $25.9B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 0.62% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 130 | |
| YTD Return | +13.22% | +21.14% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.62% | +27.10% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.17% | +29.75% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.42% | +13.15% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 16.7% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -34.1% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Apr 16, 2013 |
IVV vs MTUM Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF (MTUM) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year IVV returned +21.62% while MTUM returned +27.10%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.22% versus a gain of 21.14% for MTUM.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +22.17% per year against +29.75% for MTUM; over five years the annualized figures are +13.42% and +13.15% respectively. Across the full 13-year window we track, MTUM has the edge at +14.88% annualized vs +7.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
MTUM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.7% compared with 15.1% 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 -34.1% for MTUM. 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 0.85. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MTUM 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 1.10% against 0.62% for MTUM.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and MTUM share 109 holdings out of 523 unique holdings combined, representing a 28.4% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or MTUM?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MTUM 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 MTUM?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.62% vs +27.10% for MTUM, so MTUM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (13 years), IVV annualized +7.02% vs +14.88% for MTUM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or MTUM?
MTUM has been the more volatile fund at 16.7% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs MTUM -34.1%.
Should I hold both IVV and MTUM?
IVV and MTUM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.85, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and MTUM?
IVV and MTUM share 109 common holdings with a 28.4% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 523 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MTUM?
IVV yields 1.10% while MTUM yields 0.62%, so IVV 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.