IVV vs NMZ
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Nuveen Municipal High Income Opportunity Fund
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. NMZ offers more diversification with 893 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | NMZ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 3.75% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | - | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 7.77% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 893 | |
| YTD Return | +12.71% | +3.62% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.89% | +8.67% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.08% | +6.90% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.96% | -2.30% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 14.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -63.5% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Nuveen | |
| Category | Equity | Tax Preferred | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Nov 19, 2003 |
IVV vs NMZ Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Nuveen Municipal High Income Opportunity Fund (NMZ) is a ETF from Nuveen. Over the past year IVV returned +21.89% while NMZ returned +8.67%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.71% versus a gain of 3.62% for NMZ.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +22.08% per year against +6.90% for NMZ; over five years the annualized figures are +12.96% and -2.30% respectively. Across the full 23-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.00% annualized vs -0.30%. 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 14.1% for NMZ. 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 -63.5% for NMZ. 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 NMZ charges 3.75%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $375 annually, a gap of $372 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 7.77% for NMZ.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and NMZ share 0 holdings out of 740 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 NMZ?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while NMZ charges 3.75%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $372 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or NMZ?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.89% vs +8.67% for NMZ, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (23 years), IVV annualized +7.00% vs -0.30% for NMZ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or NMZ?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 14.1% for NMZ. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs NMZ -63.5%.
Should I hold both IVV and NMZ?
IVV and NMZ 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 NMZ?
IVV and NMZ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 740 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or NMZ?
IVV yields 1.10% while NMZ yields 7.77%, so NMZ 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.