IVV vs QABA
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund
Which is better, IVV or QABA?
Large Cap Blend against Small Cap Blend.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, QABA over 1Y. QABA is less concentrated, with 25.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%.
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
| Metric | IVV | QABA |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.60% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $99M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 2.22% |
| Holdings | 508 | 322 |
| YTD Return | +14.15% | +18.96%Best |
| 1Y Return | +17.31% | +18.51%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +23.17%Best | +22.15% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.85%Best | +7.59% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.3%Best | 22.5% |
| Max Drawdown | -33.9%Best | -51.0% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $19,128Best | $14,416 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.8% | 25.6%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | First Trust Portfolios (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Small Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jun 29, 2009 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 1, 2009 to Sep 21, 2026 (17.2 years).
IVV vs QABA 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 covers the 17.2 years both funds cover.
IVV vs QABA Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund (QABA) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US). Over the past year IVV returned +17.31% while QABA returned +18.51%. Year to date, IVV is up 14.15% versus a gain of 18.96% for QABA.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +23.17% per year against +22.15% for QABA; over five years the annualized figures are +13.85% and +7.59% respectively. Across the full 17-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +13.67% annualized vs +8.03%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QABA has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 22.5% compared with 14.3% 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 -33.9% for IVV and -51.0% for QABA. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.63. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while QABA charges 0.60%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $60 annually, a gap of $57 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 2.22% for QABA.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 490 holdings in IVV and 160 in QABA, totalling 99.3% and 99.8% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 160 in QABA, against full books of 508 and 322.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 158 positions for QABA that do not appear in our book for IVV (99.3% of the fund), and 482 for IVV that do not appear in QABA (98.6%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and QABA you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or QABA?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while QABA charges 0.60%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $57 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or QABA?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.31% vs +18.51% for QABA, so QABA leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (17 years), IVV annualized +13.67% vs +8.03% for QABA. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or QABA?
QABA has been the more volatile fund at 22.5% annualized versus 14.3% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -33.9% vs QABA -51.0%.
Should I hold both IVV and QABA?
IVV and QABA have a monthly-return correlation of 0.63, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or QABA?
IVV yields 1.06% while QABA yields 2.22%, so QABA currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QABA better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, QABA over 1Y. QABA is less concentrated, with 25.6% 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.