IVV vs NBSM
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Neuberger Berman Small-Mid Cap ETF
Which is better, IVV or NBSM?
Large Cap Blend against Small Cap Growth.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window. NBSM is less concentrated, with 20.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.9%.
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 | NBSM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.65% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $116M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 0.36% |
| Holdings | 508 | 80 |
| YTD Return | +11.57%Best | +10.43% |
| 1Y Return | +17.57%Best | +9.99% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.71% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.80% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.2%Best | 14.7% |
| Max Drawdown | -18.8%Best | -25.2% |
| $10,000 over 2.5 years | $15,029Best | $11,110 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.9% | 20.1%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Neuberger Berman |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Small Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Mar 20, 2024 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 2.5 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Mar 22, 2024 to Sep 10, 2026 (2.5 years).
IVV vs NBSM 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 covers the 2.5 years both funds cover.
IVV vs NBSM Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Neuberger Berman Small-Mid Cap ETF (NBSM) is an ETF from Neuberger Berman. Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% while NBSM returned +9.99%. Year to date, IVV is up 11.57% versus a gain of 10.43% for NBSM.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
NBSM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.7% compared with 12.2% 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 -18.8% for IVV and -25.2% for NBSM. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.64. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while NBSM charges 0.65%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $65 annually, a gap of $62 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 0.36% for NBSM.
Holdings Overlap
0.2% of IVV's money is in holdings NBSM also owns. 9.1% of NBSM's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
NBSM and IVV share little of their money.
7 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 78 in NBSM, against full books of 508 and 80.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 69 positions for NBSM that do not appear in our book for IVV (87.0% of the fund), and 488 for IVV that do not appear in NBSM (99.2%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in IVV | Weight in NBSM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| RVTYRevvity Inc | 0.02% | 1.85% | 1.83% |
| TYLTyler Technologies Inc | 0.02% | 1.75% | 1.73% |
| JKHYJack Henry & Associates Inc | 0.02% | 1.74% | 1.72% |
| VLTOVeralto Corp | 0.04% | 1.47% | 1.43% |
| LNTAlliant Energy Corp. | 0.03% | 1.45% | 1.42% |
| FICOFair Isaac Corp. | 0.04% | 0.67% | 0.63% |
| TPLTexas Pacific Land Trust | 0.03% | 0.17% | 0.14% |
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and NBSM you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or NBSM?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while NBSM charges 0.65%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $62 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or NBSM?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% vs +9.99% for NBSM, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or NBSM?
NBSM has been the more volatile fund at 14.7% annualized versus 12.2% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -18.8% vs NBSM -25.2%.
Should I hold both IVV and NBSM?
IVV and NBSM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.64, 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 NBSM?
9.1% of NBSM's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 9.1% of NBSM's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 7 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 78 in NBSM.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or NBSM?
IVV yields 1.06% while NBSM yields 0.36%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is NBSM better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window. NBSM is less concentrated, with 20.1% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.