IVV vs QMOM
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Alpha Architect US Quantitative Momentum ETF
Which is better, IVV or QMOM?
Large Cap Blend against Mid Cap Growth.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. QMOM is less concentrated, with 22.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.8%.
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 | QMOM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.28% |
| AUM | $850.0B | $383M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 0.50% |
| Holdings | 1,018 | 119 |
| YTD Return | +11.79%Best | +3.37% |
| 1Y Return | +12.11%Best | +5.33% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.40%Best | +16.44% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.69%Best | +5.16% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.0%Best | 21.7% |
| Max Drawdown | -33.9%Best | -39.1% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $17,381Best | $12,860 |
| Top 10 Weight | 38.8% | 22.7%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Alpha Architect |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Mid Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Dec 1, 2015 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 2, 2015 to Nov 12, 2026 (10.9 years).
IVV vs QMOM 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 10.9 years both funds cover.
IVV vs QMOM Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Alpha Architect US Quantitative Momentum ETF (QMOM) is an ETF from Alpha Architect. Over the past year IVV returned +12.11% while QMOM returned +5.33%. Year to date, IVV is up 11.79% versus a gain of 3.37% for QMOM.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.40% per year against +16.44% for QMOM; over five years the annualized figures are +11.69% and +5.16% respectively. Across the full 11-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +13.31% annualized vs +10.24%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QMOM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 21.7% compared with 15.0% 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 -33.9% for IVV and -39.1% for QMOM. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.78. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while QMOM charges 0.28%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $28 annually, a gap of $25 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 0.50% for QMOM.
Holdings Overlap
3.9% of IVV's money is in holdings QMOM also owns. 44.4% of QMOM's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
23 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 65 in QMOM, against full books of 1,018 and 119.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 38 positions for QMOM that do not appear in our book for IVV (48.0% of the fund), and 476 for IVV that do not appear in QMOM (95.7%).
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.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in IVV | Weight in QMOM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MPCMarathon Petroleum Corp. | 0.20% | 2.42% | 2.22% |
| VLOValero Energy | 0.20% | 2.29% | 2.09% |
| MRKMerck & Company Inc | 0.55% | 1.92% | 1.37% |
| PSXPhillips 66 | 0.18% | 2.26% | 2.08% |
| PANWPalo Alto Networks Inc. | 0.46% | 1.92% | 1.46% |
| CNCCentene | 0.05% | 2.27% | 2.22% |
| CATCaterpillar Inc | 0.52% | 1.78% | 1.26% |
| CRWDCrowdstrike Holdings Inc | 0.38% | 1.87% | 1.49% |
| FTNTFortinet Inc | 0.17% | 2.06% | 1.89% |
| NUENucor Corp. | 0.09% | 2.14% | 2.05% |
44.4% of QMOM is already inside IVV.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or QMOM?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while QMOM charges 0.28%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $25 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or QMOM?
Over the past year IVV returned +12.11% vs +5.33% for QMOM, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (11 years), IVV annualized +13.31% vs +10.24% for QMOM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or QMOM?
QMOM has been the more volatile fund at 21.7% annualized versus 15.0% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -33.9% vs QMOM -39.1%.
Should I hold both IVV and QMOM?
IVV and QMOM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.78, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and QMOM?
44.4% of QMOM's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 44.4% of QMOM's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 23 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 65 in QMOM.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or QMOM?
IVV yields 1.09% while QMOM yields 0.50%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is QMOM better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. QMOM is less concentrated, with 22.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.