IVV vs PRMR

IVV vs PRMR

Which is better, IVV or PRMR?

IVV costs less.

IVV has a lower expense ratio. PRMR is less concentrated, with 24.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%.

Lower Fees: IVVLess Concentrated: PRMR

MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.

Side-by-Side Comparison

MetricIVVPRMR
Expense Ratio0.03%Best1.00%
AUM$876.4B$91M
Dividend Yield1.06%0.00%
Holdings508340
YTD Return+12.39%+14.60%Best
1Y Return+16.61%-
3Y Return (annualized)+21.38%-
5Y Return (annualized)+13.51%-
Top 10 Weight37.8%24.3%Best
Fund FamilyiShares by BlackRock (US)PeakShares LLC
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap BlendLarge Cap Blend
InceptionMay 15, 2000Dec 8, 2025

Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.

IVV vs PRMR growth

Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.

IVV vs PRMR Performance

iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and PeakShares RMR Prime Equity ETF (PRMR) is an ETF from PeakShares LLC. Year to date, IVV is up 12.39% versus a gain of 14.60% for PRMR.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Fees and Cost Over Time

IVV charges 0.03% per year while PRMR 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 1.06% against 0.00% for PRMR.

Holdings Overlap

IVV already in PRMR54.4%
PRMR already in IVV98.7%

54.4% of IVV's money is in holdings PRMR also owns. 98.7% of PRMR's money is in holdings IVV also owns.

Most of PRMR is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.

51 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 52 in PRMR, against full books of 508 and 340.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 1 positions for PRMR that do not appear in our book for IVV (0.3% of the fund), and 431 for IVV that do not appear in PRMR (44.2%).

Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.

Top Shared Holdings

StockWeight in IVVWeight in PRMRDifference
NVDANvidia Corp8.07%2.16%5.91%
AAPLApple, Inc7.02%2.15%4.87%
MSFTMicrosoft Corp5.69%2.52%3.17%
AMZNAmazon.Com Inc3.84%2.04%1.80%
AVGOBroadcom Inc2.65%1.88%0.77%
GOOGAlphabet Inc2.39%1.81%0.58%
METAMeta Platforms Inc1.90%2.03%0.13%
JPMJpmorgan Chase1.44%2.11%0.67%
TSLATesla Inc1.56%1.84%0.28%
PLTRPalantir Technologies Inc0.65%2.70%2.05%

98.7% of PRMR is already inside IVV.

You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.

IVVPRMR

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, IVV or PRMR?

IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while PRMR charges 1.00%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $97 a year on a $10,000 investment.

What is the holdings overlap between IVV and PRMR?

98.7% of PRMR's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 98.7% of PRMR's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 51 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 52 in PRMR.

Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or PRMR?

IVV yields 1.06% while PRMR yields 0.00%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is PRMR better than IVV?

IVV has a lower expense ratio. PRMR is less concentrated, with 24.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.