IVV vs QCOC
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - October
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 | QCOC | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.90% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $63M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 0.00% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 5 | |
| YTD Return | +12.28% | +7.99% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.94% | +11.92% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.81% | - | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.05% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 6.7% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -10.4% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | First Trust Portfolios (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Alternative | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Oct 18, 2024 |
IVV vs QCOC Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Conservative Buffer ETF - October (QCOC) is a ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US). Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% while QCOC returned +11.92%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.28% versus a gain of 7.99% for QCOC.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 6.7% for QCOC. 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 -10.4% for QCOC. 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 0.95. 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 QCOC 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 QCOC.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and QCOC 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 QCOC?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while QCOC 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 QCOC?
Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% vs +11.92% for QCOC, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), IVV annualized +6.98% vs +11.57% for QCOC. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or QCOC?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 6.7% for QCOC. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs QCOC -10.4%.
Should I hold both IVV and QCOC?
IVV and QCOC have a monthly-return correlation of 0.95, 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 QCOC?
IVV and QCOC share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 506 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or QCOC?
IVV yields 1.10% while QCOC 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.