IVV vs QABA
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. QABA delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | QABA | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.60% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $92M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 2.34% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 147 | |
| YTD Return | +13.43% | +24.07% | |
| 1Y Return | +22.61% | +32.91% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.47% | +19.07% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.26% | +6.91% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 22.5% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -51.0% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | First Trust Portfolios (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jun 29, 2009 |
IVV vs QABA Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and First Trust NASDAQ ABA Community Bank Index Fund (QABA) is a ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US). Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% while QABA returned +32.91%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.43% versus a gain of 24.07% for QABA.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.47% per year against +19.07% for QABA; over five years the annualized figures are +13.26% and +6.91% respectively. Across the full 17-year window we track, QABA has the edge at +8.35% annualized vs +7.03%. 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 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 -51.0% for QABA. 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 0.63. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
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 1.09% against 2.34% for QABA.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and QABA share 0 holdings out of 665 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 QABA?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while QABA charges 0.60%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $57 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or QABA?
Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% vs +32.91% for QABA, so QABA leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (17 years), IVV annualized +7.03% vs +8.35% for QABA. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or QABA?
QABA has been the more volatile fund at 22.5% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs QABA -51.0%.
Should I hold both IVV and QABA?
IVV and QABA have a monthly-return correlation of 0.63, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and QABA?
IVV and QABA share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 665 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or QABA?
IVV yields 1.09% while QABA yields 2.34%, so QABA 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.