IVV vs PCGG
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Polen Capital Global 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 | PCGG | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.85% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | - | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 0.00% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 37 | |
| YTD Return | +13.43% | -2.95% | |
| 1Y Return | +22.61% | -4.63% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.47% | +4.68% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.26% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 15.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -22.7% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iMGP Funds | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Aug 30, 2023 |
IVV vs PCGG Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Polen Capital Global Growth ETF (PCGG) is a ETF from iMGP Funds. Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% while PCGG returned -4.63%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.43% versus a loss of 2.95% for PCGG.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.47% per year against +4.68% for PCGG. Across the full 3-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.03% annualized vs +4.68%. 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 15.1% for PCGG. 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 -22.7% for PCGG. 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 0.90. 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 PCGG charges 0.85%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $85 annually, a gap of $82 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 0.00% for PCGG.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and PCGG share 20 holdings out of 517 unique holdings combined, representing a 28.1% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or PCGG?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while PCGG charges 0.85%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $82 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or PCGG?
Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% vs -4.63% for PCGG, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (3 years), IVV annualized +7.03% vs +4.68% for PCGG. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or PCGG?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 15.1% for PCGG. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs PCGG -22.7%.
Should I hold both IVV and PCGG?
IVV and PCGG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.90, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and PCGG?
IVV and PCGG share 20 common holdings with a 28.1% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 517 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or PCGG?
IVV yields 1.09% while PCGG yields 0.00%, 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.