IVV vs QCMU
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Direxion Daily QCOM Bull 2X ETF
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 | QCMU | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 1.07% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $22M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 4.38% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 9 | |
| YTD Return | +12.71% | -34.82% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.89% | -22.85% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.08% | - | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.96% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 136.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -68.7% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Direxion Shares ETF Trust | |
| Category | Equity | Alternative | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jun 25, 2025 |
IVV vs QCMU Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Direxion Daily QCOM Bull 2X ETF (QCMU) is a ETF from Direxion Shares ETF Trust. Over the past year IVV returned +21.89% while QCMU returned -22.85%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.71% versus a loss of 34.82% for QCMU.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QCMU has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 136.3% 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 -68.7% for QCMU. 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 0.81. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while QCMU charges 1.07%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $107 annually, a gap of $104 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 4.38% for QCMU.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and QCMU share 1 holdings out of 509 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.3% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in IVV | Weight in QCMU | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| QCOM | 0.28% | 15.94% | 15.66% |
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or QCMU?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while QCMU charges 1.07%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $104 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or QCMU?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.89% vs -22.85% for QCMU, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (1 years), IVV annualized +7.00% vs -23.72% for QCMU. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or QCMU?
QCMU has been the more volatile fund at 136.3% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs QCMU -68.7%.
Should I hold both IVV and QCMU?
IVV and QCMU have a monthly-return correlation of 0.81, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and QCMU?
IVV and QCMU share 1 common holdings with a 0.3% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 509 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or QCMU?
IVV yields 1.10% while QCMU yields 4.38%, so QCMU 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.