IVV vs MUB
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs iShares National Muni Bond ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. MUB offers more diversification with 874 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | MUB | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.05% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $45.2B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 3.16% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 6,825 | |
| YTD Return | +13.72% | +0.41% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.64% | +4.78% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.55% | +3.13% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.27% | +0.65% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 5.4% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -14.1% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Tax Preferred | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Sep 7, 2007 |
IVV vs MUB Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and iShares National Muni Bond ETF (MUB) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% while MUB returned +4.78%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.72% versus a gain of 0.41% for MUB.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.55% per year against +3.13% for MUB; over five years the annualized figures are +13.27% and +0.65% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.04% annualized vs +0.99%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 5.4% for MUB. 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 -14.1% for MUB. 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 0.28. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MUB charges 0.05%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $5 annually, a gap of $2 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 3.16% for MUB.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and MUB share 0 holdings out of 1379 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 MUB?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MUB charges 0.05%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $2 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or MUB?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% vs +4.78% for MUB, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), IVV annualized +7.04% vs +0.99% for MUB. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or MUB?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 5.4% for MUB. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs MUB -14.1%.
Should I hold both IVV and MUB?
IVV and MUB have a monthly-return correlation of 0.28, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and MUB?
IVV and MUB share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 1379 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MUB?
IVV yields 1.09% while MUB yields 3.16%, so MUB 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.