IVV vs NULG
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Nuveen ESG Large-Cap Growth ETF
Which is better, IVV or NULG?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y and 5Y, NULG over the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.93. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 45.5%.
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 | NULG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.26% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $2.9B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 0.10% |
| Holdings | 508 | 71 |
| YTD Return | +11.57% | +12.76%Best |
| 1Y Return | +17.57%Best | +11.73% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.71%Best | +20.56% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.80%Best | +11.20% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.6%Best | 18.8% |
| Max Drawdown | -33.9%Best | -36.2% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,262Best | $17,003 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.9%Best | 45.5% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Nuveen |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Dec 13, 2016 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 14, 2016 to Sep 10, 2026 (9.7 years).
IVV vs NULG 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 9.7 years both funds cover.
IVV vs NULG Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Nuveen ESG Large-Cap Growth ETF (NULG) is an ETF from Nuveen. Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% while NULG returned +11.73%. Year to date, IVV is up 11.57% versus a gain of 12.76% for NULG.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +20.71% per year against +20.56% for NULG; over five years the annualized figures are +12.80% and +11.20% respectively. Across the full 10-year window we track, NULG has the edge at +18.11% annualized vs +14.11%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
NULG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.8% compared with 15.6% 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 -33.9% for IVV and -36.2% for NULG. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.93. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while NULG charges 0.26%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $26 annually, a gap of $23 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 0.10% for NULG.
Holdings Overlap
22.8% of IVV's money is in holdings NULG also owns. 92.1% of NULG's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
Most of NULG is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
55 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 67 in NULG, against full books of 508 and 71.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 12 positions for NULG that do not appear in our book for IVV (6.3% of the fund), and 441 for IVV that do not appear in NULG (76.6%).
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 NULG | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp. | 7.98% | 15.91% | 7.93% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.98% | 6.49% | 3.51% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 1.39% | 4.10% | 2.71% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc. | 1.18% | 3.56% | 2.38% |
| VVisa Inc | 0.92% | 3.01% | 2.09% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 0.64% | 2.70% | 2.06% |
| PANWPalo Alto Networks Inc. | 0.44% | 2.79% | 2.35% |
| LRCXLam Research Corpcommon Stock | 0.58% | 2.60% | 2.02% |
| CATCaterpillar, Inc. | 0.60% | 2.26% | 1.66% |
| NFLXNetflix, Inc. | 0.47% | 1.93% | 1.46% |
92.1% of NULG is already inside IVV.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or NULG?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while NULG charges 0.26%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $23 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or NULG?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% vs +11.73% for NULG, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (10 years), IVV annualized +14.11% vs +18.11% for NULG. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or NULG?
NULG has been the more volatile fund at 18.8% annualized versus 15.6% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -33.9% vs NULG -36.2%.
Should I hold both IVV and NULG?
IVV and NULG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.93, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and NULG?
92.1% of NULG's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 92.1% of NULG's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 55 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 67 in NULG.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or NULG?
IVV yields 1.06% while NULG yields 0.10%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is NULG better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y and 5Y, NULG over the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.93. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 45.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.