IVV vs QTR
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF
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 | QTR | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.25% | |
| AUM | $886.7B | $9M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 17.12% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 107 | |
| YTD Return | +12.13% | +10.47% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.37% | +18.35% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.91% | +18.28% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.59% | +10.02% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 18.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -31.7% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | GLOBALXETFS | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Aug 25, 2021 |
IVV vs QTR Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Global X NASDAQ 100 Tail Risk ETF (QTR) is a ETF from GLOBALXETFS. Over the past year IVV returned +20.37% while QTR returned +18.35%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.13% versus a gain of 10.47% for QTR.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +20.91% per year against +18.28% for QTR; over five years the annualized figures are +12.59% and +10.02% respectively. Across the full 5-year window we track, QTR has the edge at +10.25% annualized vs +6.97%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QTR has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.6% 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 -31.7% for QTR. 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 0.88. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while QTR 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 1.10% against 17.12% for QTR.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and QTR share 87 holdings out of 520 unique holdings combined, representing a 54.0% weight overlap.
High overlap means holding both may not provide much additional diversification.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or QTR?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while QTR 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 QTR?
Over the past year IVV returned +20.37% vs +18.35% for QTR, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (5 years), IVV annualized +6.97% vs +10.25% for QTR. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or QTR?
QTR has been the more volatile fund at 18.6% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs QTR -31.7%.
Should I hold both IVV and QTR?
IVV and QTR have a monthly-return correlation of 0.88, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and QTR?
IVV and QTR share 87 common holdings with a 54.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 520 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or QTR?
IVV yields 1.10% while QTR yields 17.12%, so QTR 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.