IVV vs NZF
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Nuveen Municipal Credit Income Fund
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 | NZF | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 3.61% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | - | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 7.54% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 671 | |
| YTD Return | +13.72% | +2.02% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.64% | +11.42% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.55% | +9.91% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.27% | -0.71% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 13.0% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -53.7% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Nuveen | |
| Category | Equity | Tax Preferred | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Sep 25, 2001 |
IVV vs NZF Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Nuveen Municipal Credit Income Fund (NZF) is a ETF from Nuveen. Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% while NZF returned +11.42%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.72% versus a gain of 2.02% for NZF.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.55% per year against +9.91% for NZF; over five years the annualized figures are +13.27% and -0.71% respectively. Across the full 25-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.04% annualized vs +0.55%. 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 13.0% for NZF. 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 -53.7% for NZF. 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 0.27. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while NZF charges 3.61%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $361 annually, a gap of $358 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 7.54% for NZF.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and NZF share 0 holdings out of 759 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 NZF?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while NZF charges 3.61%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $358 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or NZF?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% vs +11.42% for NZF, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (25 years), IVV annualized +7.04% vs +0.55% for NZF. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or NZF?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 13.0% for NZF. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs NZF -53.7%.
Should I hold both IVV and NZF?
IVV and NZF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.27, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and NZF?
IVV and NZF share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 759 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or NZF?
IVV yields 1.09% while NZF yields 7.54%, so NZF 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.