IVV vs QLTI
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs GMO International Quality ETF
Which is better, IVV or QLTI?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 42.6%.
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 | QLTI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.60% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $299M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 0.58% |
| Holdings | 508 | 38 |
| YTD Return | +11.57%Best | -0.61% |
| 1Y Return | +17.57%Best | +5.53% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.71% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.80% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 12.9%Best | 13.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -18.8% | -14.8%Best |
| $10,000 over 1.9 years | $13,384Best | $10,760 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.9%Best | 42.6% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | GMO |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Oct 28, 2024 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 1.9 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 29, 2024 to Sep 10, 2026 (1.9 years).
IVV vs QLTI 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 1.9 years both funds cover.
IVV vs QLTI Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and GMO International Quality ETF (QLTI) is an ETF from GMO. Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% while QLTI returned +5.53%. Year to date, IVV is up 11.57% versus a loss of 0.61% for QLTI.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QLTI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 13.3% compared with 12.9% 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 -18.8% for IVV and -14.8% for QLTI. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.52. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while QLTI charges 0.60%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $60 annually, a gap of $57 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 0.58% for QLTI.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 505 holdings in IVV and 36 in QLTI, totalling 100.0% and 99.8% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 36 in QLTI, against full books of 508 and 38.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 6 positions for QLTI that do not appear in our book for IVV (16.9% of the fund), and 495 for IVV that do not appear in QLTI (99.3%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and QLTI you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or QLTI?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while QLTI charges 0.60%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $57 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or QLTI?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% vs +5.53% for QLTI, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), IVV annualized +16.58% vs +3.93% for QLTI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or QLTI?
QLTI has been the more volatile fund at 13.3% annualized versus 12.9% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -18.8% vs QLTI -14.8%.
Should I hold both IVV and QLTI?
IVV and QLTI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.52, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or QLTI?
IVV yields 1.06% while QLTI yields 0.58%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QLTI better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 42.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.