IVV vs MUST
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income 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 | MUST | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.23% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $599M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 3.31% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 514 | |
| YTD Return | +13.43% | +0.26% | |
| 1Y Return | +22.61% | +4.60% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.47% | +3.20% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.26% | +0.38% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 6.0% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -13.8% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Columbia Threadneedle Investments | |
| Category | Equity | Tax Preferred | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Oct 10, 2018 |
IVV vs MUST Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Columbia Multi-Sector Municipal Income ETF (MUST) is a ETF from Columbia Threadneedle Investments. Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% while MUST returned +4.60%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.43% versus a gain of 0.26% for MUST.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.47% per year against +3.20% for MUST; over five years the annualized figures are +13.26% and +0.38% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.03% annualized vs +2.00%. 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 6.0% for MUST. 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 -13.8% for MUST. 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 0.50. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while MUST charges 0.23%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $23 annually, a gap of $20 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 3.31% for MUST.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and MUST share 0 holdings out of 608 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 MUST?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while MUST charges 0.23%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $20 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or MUST?
Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% vs +4.60% for MUST, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), IVV annualized +7.03% vs +2.00% for MUST. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or MUST?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 6.0% for MUST. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs MUST -13.8%.
Should I hold both IVV and MUST?
IVV and MUST have a monthly-return correlation of 0.50, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and MUST?
IVV and MUST share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 608 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or MUST?
IVV yields 1.09% while MUST yields 3.31%, so MUST 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.