IVV vs QYLG
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. QYLG delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | QYLG | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.35% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $169M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 17.67% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 106 | |
| YTD Return | +12.71% | +14.26% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.89% | +25.95% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.08% | +20.53% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.96% | +11.29% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 15.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -30.0% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | GLOBALXETFS | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Sep 18, 2020 |
IVV vs QYLG Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Global X Nasdaq 100 Covered Call & Growth ETF (QYLG) is a ETF from GLOBALXETFS. Over the past year IVV returned +21.89% while QYLG returned +25.95%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.71% versus a gain of 14.26% for QYLG.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +22.08% per year against +20.53% for QYLG; over five years the annualized figures are +12.96% and +11.29% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, QYLG has the edge at +13.82% annualized vs +7.00%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
QYLG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.3% 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 -30.0% for QYLG. 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 0.91. 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 QYLG charges 0.35%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $35 annually, a gap of $32 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 17.67% for QYLG.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and QYLG share 87 holdings out of 521 unique holdings combined, representing a 53.6% weight overlap.
High overlap means holding both may not provide much additional diversification.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or QYLG?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while QYLG charges 0.35%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $32 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or QYLG?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.89% vs +25.95% for QYLG, so QYLG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), IVV annualized +7.00% vs +13.82% for QYLG. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or QYLG?
QYLG has been the more volatile fund at 15.3% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs QYLG -30.0%.
Should I hold both IVV and QYLG?
IVV and QYLG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, 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 QYLG?
IVV and QYLG share 87 common holdings with a 53.6% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 521 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or QYLG?
IVV yields 1.10% while QYLG yields 17.67%, so QYLG 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.