IVV vs PCQ
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs PIMCO California Municipal 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 | PCQ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 1.20% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $556M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 4.28% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 263 | |
| YTD Return | +13.80% | +4.06% | |
| 1Y Return | +23.01% | +13.01% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.77% | +1.19% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.39% | -10.05% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 15.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -60.6% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | PIMCO (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Tax Preferred | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jun 29, 2001 |
IVV vs PCQ Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and PIMCO California Municipal Income Fund (PCQ) is a ETF from PIMCO (US). Over the past year IVV returned +23.01% while PCQ returned +13.01%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.80% versus a gain of 4.06% for PCQ.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.77% per year against +1.19% for PCQ; over five years the annualized figures are +13.39% and -10.05% respectively. Across the full 25-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.04% annualized vs -1.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
PCQ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.6% 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 -60.6% for PCQ. 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 0.28. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while PCQ charges 1.20%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $120 annually, a gap of $117 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 4.28% for PCQ.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and PCQ share 0 holdings out of 589 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 PCQ?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while PCQ charges 1.20%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $117 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or PCQ?
Over the past year IVV returned +23.01% vs +13.01% for PCQ, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (25 years), IVV annualized +7.04% vs -1.10% for PCQ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or PCQ?
PCQ has been the more volatile fund at 15.6% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs PCQ -60.6%.
Should I hold both IVV and PCQ?
IVV and PCQ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.28, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and PCQ?
IVV and PCQ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 589 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or PCQ?
IVV yields 1.09% while PCQ yields 4.28%, so PCQ 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.