IVV vs PCEM
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Polen Capital Emerging Markets ex-China Growth ETF
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 | PCEM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 1.00% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $3M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 0.34% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 35 | |
| YTD Return | +13.43% | +4.05% | |
| 1Y Return | +22.61% | +20.55% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.47% | - | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.26% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 15.5% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -19.9% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Polen Capital | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Sep 10, 2024 |
IVV vs PCEM Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Polen Capital Emerging Markets ex-China Growth ETF (PCEM) is a ETF from Polen Capital. Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% while PCEM returned +20.55%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.43% versus a gain of 4.05% for PCEM.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
PCEM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.5% 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 -19.9% for PCEM. 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 0.49. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while PCEM charges 1.00%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $100 annually, a gap of $97 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 0.34% for PCEM.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and PCEM share 0 holdings out of 540 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 PCEM?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while PCEM charges 1.00%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $97 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or PCEM?
Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% vs +20.55% for PCEM, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), IVV annualized +7.03% vs +12.35% for PCEM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or PCEM?
PCEM has been the more volatile fund at 15.5% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs PCEM -19.9%.
Should I hold both IVV and PCEM?
IVV and PCEM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.49, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and PCEM?
IVV and PCEM share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 540 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or PCEM?
IVV yields 1.09% while PCEM yields 0.34%, so IVV 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.