IVV vs QMNV
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - November
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 | QMNV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.90% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $59M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 0.00% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 5 | |
| YTD Return | +12.28% | +8.63% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.94% | +16.32% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.81% | - | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.05% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 8.1% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -12.8% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | First Trust Portfolios (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Alternative | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Nov 15, 2024 |
IVV vs QMNV Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and FT Vest Nasdaq-100 Moderate Buffer ETF - November (QMNV) is a ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US). Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% while QMNV returned +16.32%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.28% versus a gain of 8.63% for QMNV.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 8.1% for QMNV. 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 -12.8% for QMNV. 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 0.94. 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 QMNV 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 QMNV.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and QMNV 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 QMNV?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while QMNV 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 QMNV?
Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% vs +16.32% for QMNV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), IVV annualized +6.98% vs +14.71% for QMNV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or QMNV?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 8.1% for QMNV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs QMNV -12.8%.
Should I hold both IVV and QMNV?
IVV and QMNV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, 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 QMNV?
IVV and QMNV share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 506 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or QMNV?
IVV yields 1.10% while QMNV 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.