IVV vs QMAG
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - August
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 | QMAG | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.90% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $53M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 0.00% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 5 | |
| YTD Return | +12.71% | +8.93% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.89% | +14.41% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.08% | - | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.96% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 7.5% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -12.4% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | First Trust Portfolios (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Alternative | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Aug 16, 2024 |
IVV vs QMAG Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - August (QMAG) is a ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US). Over the past year IVV returned +21.89% while QMAG returned +14.41%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.71% versus a gain of 8.93% for QMAG.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 7.5% for QMAG. 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 -12.4% for QMAG. 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 QMAG 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 QMAG.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and QMAG 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 QMAG?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while QMAG 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 QMAG?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.89% vs +14.41% for QMAG, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), IVV annualized +7.00% vs +13.13% for QMAG. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or QMAG?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 7.5% for QMAG. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs QMAG -12.4%.
Should I hold both IVV and QMAG?
IVV and QMAG 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 QMAG?
IVV and QMAG share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 506 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or QMAG?
IVV yields 1.10% while QMAG 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.