IVV vs QDIV
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Global X S&P 500 Quality Dividend ETF
Which is better, IVV or QDIV?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Value.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. QDIV is less concentrated, with 22.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%.
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 | QDIV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.20% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $31M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 2.72% |
| Holdings | 508 | 53 |
| YTD Return | +14.14% | +14.55%Best |
| 1Y Return | +17.30%Best | +16.19% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +23.04%Best | +11.79% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.63%Best | +8.33% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.7%Best | 18.0% |
| Max Drawdown | -33.9%Best | -41.5% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,944Best | $14,919 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.8% | 22.7%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Global X by mirae Asset |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jul 13, 2018 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jul 17, 2018 to Sep 22, 2026 (8.2 years).
IVV vs QDIV 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 8.2 years both funds cover.
IVV vs QDIV Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Global X S&P 500 Quality Dividend ETF (QDIV) is an ETF from Global X by mirae Asset. Over the past year IVV returned +17.30% while QDIV returned +16.19%. Year to date, IVV is up 14.14% versus a gain of 14.55% for QDIV.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +23.04% per year against +11.79% for QDIV; over five years the annualized figures are +13.63% and +8.33% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +14.26% annualized vs +7.87%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QDIV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.0% compared with 16.7% 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 -33.9% for IVV and -41.5% for QDIV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.82. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while QDIV charges 0.20%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $20 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 2.72% for QDIV.
Holdings Overlap
5.6% of IVV's money is in holdings QDIV also owns. 90.6% of QDIV's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
Most of QDIV is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
45 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 50 in QDIV, against full books of 508 and 53.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 4 positions for QDIV that do not appear in our book for IVV (7.0% of the fund), and 438 for IVV that do not appear in QDIV (93.2%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in IVV | Weight in QDIV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| XOMExxon Mobil Corp. | 1.01% | 2.02% | 1.01% |
| GILDGilead Sciences | 0.27% | 2.29% | 2.02% |
| TGTTarget Corp Common Stock Usd.0833 | 0.11% | 2.37% | 2.26% |
| BMYBristol-Myers Squibb Co. | 0.21% | 2.23% | 2.02% |
| ADPAutomatic Data Processing, Inc. | 0.17% | 2.27% | 2.10% |
| BDXBecton Dickinson And Co. | 0.08% | 2.35% | 2.27% |
| COPConocophillips Common Stock USD 0.01 | 0.24% | 2.10% | 1.86% |
| PGProcter & Gamble Company | 0.51% | 1.82% | 1.31% |
| BLKBlackrock Funding Inc/De | 0.25% | 2.07% | 1.82% |
| CTSHCognizant Technology Solutions Corp. Class A | 0.05% | 2.27% | 2.22% |
90.6% of QDIV is already inside IVV.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or QDIV?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while QDIV charges 0.20%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $17 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or QDIV?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.30% vs +16.19% for QDIV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), IVV annualized +14.26% vs +7.87% for QDIV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or QDIV?
QDIV has been the more volatile fund at 18.0% annualized versus 16.7% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -33.9% vs QDIV -41.5%.
Should I hold both IVV and QDIV?
IVV and QDIV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.82, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and QDIV?
90.6% of QDIV's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 90.6% of QDIV's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 45 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 50 in QDIV.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or QDIV?
IVV yields 1.06% while QDIV yields 2.72%, so QDIV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QDIV better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. QDIV is less concentrated, with 22.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.