IVV vs QEMM
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs State Street SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. QEMM delivered stronger 1-year returns. QEMM offers more diversification with 855 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | QEMM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.30% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $61M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 4.52% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 855 | |
| YTD Return | +12.28% | +21.58% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.94% | +32.51% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.81% | +19.82% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.05% | +8.59% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 14.5% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -40.5% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | SPDR State Street Global Advisors | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jun 4, 2014 |
IVV vs QEMM Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and State Street SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets StrategicFactors ETF (QEMM) is a ETF from SPDR State Street Global Advisors. Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% while QEMM returned +32.51%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.28% versus a gain of 21.58% for QEMM.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.81% per year against +19.82% for QEMM; over five years the annualized figures are +13.05% and +8.59% respectively. Across the full 12-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +6.98% annualized vs +4.33%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 14.5% for QEMM. 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 -40.5% for QEMM. 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 0.72. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while QEMM charges 0.30%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $30 annually, a gap of $27 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 4.52% for QEMM.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and QEMM share 0 holdings out of 1311 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 QEMM?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while QEMM charges 0.30%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $27 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or QEMM?
Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% vs +32.51% for QEMM, so QEMM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (12 years), IVV annualized +6.98% vs +4.33% for QEMM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or QEMM?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 14.5% for QEMM. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs QEMM -40.5%.
Should I hold both IVV and QEMM?
IVV and QEMM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.72, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and QEMM?
IVV and QEMM share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 1311 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or QEMM?
IVV yields 1.10% while QEMM yields 4.52%, so QEMM 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.