IVV vs PGJ
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Invesco Golden Dragon China 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 | PGJ | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.70% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $94M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 3.40% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 74 | |
| YTD Return | +13.80% | -13.37% | |
| 1Y Return | +23.01% | -8.48% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.77% | +0.10% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.39% | -9.19% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 30.2% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -78.4% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Dec 9, 2004 |
IVV vs PGJ Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Invesco Golden Dragon China ETF (PGJ) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year IVV returned +23.01% while PGJ returned -8.48%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.80% versus a loss of 13.37% for PGJ.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.77% per year against +0.10% for PGJ; over five years the annualized figures are +13.39% and -9.19% respectively. Across the full 22-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.04% annualized vs +3.26%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
PGJ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 30.2% 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 -78.4% for PGJ. 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 0.50. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while PGJ charges 0.70%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $70 annually, a gap of $67 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 3.40% for PGJ.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and PGJ share 0 holdings out of 577 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 PGJ?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while PGJ charges 0.70%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $67 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or PGJ?
Over the past year IVV returned +23.01% vs -8.48% for PGJ, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (22 years), IVV annualized +7.04% vs +3.26% for PGJ. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or PGJ?
PGJ has been the more volatile fund at 30.2% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs PGJ -78.4%.
Should I hold both IVV and PGJ?
IVV and PGJ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.50, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and PGJ?
IVV and PGJ share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 577 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or PGJ?
IVV yields 1.09% while PGJ yields 3.40%, so PGJ 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.