IVV vs PBW
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. PBW delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | PBW | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.64% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $386M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 1.21% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 71 | |
| YTD Return | +13.80% | +8.30% | |
| 1Y Return | +23.70% | +51.16% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.49% | -2.86% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.43% | -14.55% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 35.5% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -89.7% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Mar 3, 2005 |
IVV vs PBW Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Invesco WilderHill Clean Energy ETF (PBW) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year IVV returned +23.70% while PBW returned +51.16%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.80% versus a gain of 8.30% for PBW.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.49% per year against -2.86% for PBW; over five years the annualized figures are +13.43% and -14.55% respectively. Across the full 21-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.05% annualized vs -3.19%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
PBW has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 35.5% compared with 15.1% 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 -56.5% for IVV and -89.7% for PBW. 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 0.69. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while PBW charges 0.64%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $64 annually, a gap of $61 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 1.21% for PBW.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and PBW share 5 holdings out of 569 unique holdings combined, representing a 1.6% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or PBW?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while PBW charges 0.64%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $61 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or PBW?
Over the past year IVV returned +23.70% vs +51.16% for PBW, so PBW leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (21 years), IVV annualized +7.05% vs -3.19% for PBW. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or PBW?
PBW has been the more volatile fund at 35.5% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs PBW -89.7%.
Should I hold both IVV and PBW?
IVV and PBW have a monthly-return correlation of 0.69, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and PBW?
IVV and PBW share 5 common holdings with a 1.6% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 569 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or PBW?
IVV yields 1.09% while PBW yields 1.21%, so PBW 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.