IVV vs QLC
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. QLC delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | QLC | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.25% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $1.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 0.94% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 178 | |
| YTD Return | +13.80% | +14.80% | |
| 1Y Return | +23.01% | +27.92% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.77% | +24.61% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.39% | +14.80% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 16.5% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -35.9% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Flexshares Trust | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Sep 23, 2015 |
IVV vs QLC Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and FlexShares US Quality Large Cap Index Fund (QLC) is a ETF from Flexshares Trust. Over the past year IVV returned +23.01% while QLC returned +27.92%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.80% versus a gain of 14.80% for QLC.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.77% per year against +24.61% for QLC; over five years the annualized figures are +13.39% and +14.80% respectively. Across the full 11-year window we track, QLC has the edge at +14.52% annualized vs +7.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QLC has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.5% 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 -35.9% for QLC. 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 0.93. 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 QLC charges 0.25%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $25 annually, a gap of $22 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 0.94% for QLC.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and QLC share 156 holdings out of 524 unique holdings combined, representing a 55.8% weight overlap.
High overlap means holding both may not provide much additional diversification.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or QLC?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while QLC charges 0.25%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $22 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or QLC?
Over the past year IVV returned +23.01% vs +27.92% for QLC, so QLC leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (11 years), IVV annualized +7.04% vs +14.52% for QLC. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or QLC?
QLC has been the more volatile fund at 16.5% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs QLC -35.9%.
Should I hold both IVV and QLC?
IVV and QLC have a monthly-return correlation of 0.93, 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 QLC?
IVV and QLC share 156 common holdings with a 55.8% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 524 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or QLC?
IVV yields 1.09% while QLC yields 0.94%, 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.