IVV vs QCJL
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - July
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | QCJL | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.90% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $97M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 0.00% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 5 | |
| YTD Return | +12.71% | +7.98% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.89% | +12.58% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.08% | - | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.96% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 6.4% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -11.2% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | First Trust Portfolios (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Alternative | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jul 19, 2024 |
IVV vs QCJL Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - July (QCJL) is a ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US). Over the past year IVV returned +21.89% while QCJL returned +12.58%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.71% versus a gain of 7.98% for QCJL.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 6.4% for QCJL. 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 -11.2% for QCJL. 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 0.92. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while QCJL charges 0.90%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $90 annually, a gap of $87 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 0.00% for QCJL.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and QCJL share 0 holdings out of 506 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 QCJL?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while QCJL charges 0.90%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $87 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or QCJL?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.89% vs +12.58% for QCJL, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), IVV annualized +7.00% vs +12.17% for QCJL. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or QCJL?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 6.4% for QCJL. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs QCJL -11.2%.
Should I hold both IVV and QCJL?
IVV and QCJL have a monthly-return correlation of 0.92, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and QCJL?
IVV and QCJL share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 506 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or QCJL?
IVV yields 1.10% while QCJL yields 0.00%, so IVV 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.