IVV vs QBF
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly
Which is better, IVV or QBF?
Large Cap Blend against Option Writing.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window.
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 | QBF |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.79% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $14M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 1.64% |
| Holdings | 508 | 10 |
| YTD Return | +12.39%Best | -15.51% |
| 1Y Return | +16.61%Best | -33.89% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.38% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.51% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.1%Best | 31.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -18.8%Best | -49.4% |
| $10,000 over 1.6 years | $12,794Best | $7,274 |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Innovator ETFs Trust |
| Category | Equity | Alternative |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Option Writing |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Feb 6, 2025 |
Not shown on this pair: Top 10 Weight.
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.6 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Feb 6, 2025 to Sep 18, 2026 (1.6 years).
IVV vs QBF 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 1.6 years both funds cover.
IVV vs QBF Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Innovator Uncapped Bitcoin 20 Floor ETF - Quarterly (QBF) is an ETF from Innovator ETFs Trust. Over the past year IVV returned +16.61% while QBF returned -33.89%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.39% versus a loss of 15.51% for QBF.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QBF has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 31.3% compared with 13.1% 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 -18.8% for IVV and -49.4% for QBF. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.42. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while QBF charges 0.79%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $79 annually, a gap of $76 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 1.64% for QBF.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and QBF 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 QBF?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while QBF charges 0.79%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $76 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or QBF?
Over the past year IVV returned +16.61% vs -33.89% for QBF, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), IVV annualized +16.65% vs -18.04% for QBF. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or QBF?
QBF has been the more volatile fund at 31.3% annualized versus 13.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -18.8% vs QBF -49.4%.
Should I hold both IVV and QBF?
IVV and QBF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.42, 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 QBF?
IVV yields 1.06% while QBF yields 1.64%, so QBF currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QBF better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.