IVV vs RDVY
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF
Which is better, IVV or RDVY?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Value.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, RDVY over 1Y. RDVY is less concentrated, with 23.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%.
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 | RDVY |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.47% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $25.2B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 0.83% |
| Holdings | 508 | 144 |
| YTD Return | +12.39% | +13.57%Best |
| 1Y Return | +16.61% | +19.58%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.38%Best | +20.64% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.51%Best | +12.77% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.6%Best | 17.8% |
| Max Drawdown | -33.9%Best | -40.6% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,844Best | $18,238 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.8% | 23.7%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | First Trust Portfolios (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jan 6, 2014 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jan 7, 2014 to Sep 18, 2026 (12.7 years).
IVV vs RDVY 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 12.7 years both funds cover.
IVV vs RDVY Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF (RDVY) is an ETF from First Trust Portfolios (US). Over the past year IVV returned +16.61% while RDVY returned +19.58%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.39% versus a gain of 13.57% for RDVY.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.38% per year against +20.64% for RDVY; over five years the annualized figures are +13.51% and +12.77% respectively. Across the full 13-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +12.55% annualized vs +12.20%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
RDVY has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.8% compared with 14.6% 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 -40.6% for RDVY. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.89. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while RDVY charges 0.47%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $47 annually, a gap of $44 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 0.83% for RDVY.
Holdings Overlap
40.0% of IVV's money is in holdings RDVY also owns. 94.0% of RDVY's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
Most of RDVY is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
64 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 71 in RDVY, against full books of 508 and 144.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 7 positions for RDVY that do not appear in our book for IVV (5.8% of the fund), and 419 for IVV that do not appear in RDVY (58.8%).
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 RDVY | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.07% | 2.10% | 5.97% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 7.02% | 1.57% | 5.45% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.69% | 1.96% | 3.73% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 3.00% | 2.01% | 0.99% |
| LRCXLrcx Uw Equity | 0.57% | 3.06% | 2.49% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 0.55% | 2.96% | 2.41% |
| JPMJpmorgan Chase | 1.44% | 2.06% | 0.62% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 1.90% | 1.52% | 0.38% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.63% | 1.51% | 0.12% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 0.95% | 2.01% | 1.06% |
94.0% of RDVY 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 RDVY?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while RDVY charges 0.47%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $44 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or RDVY?
Over the past year IVV returned +16.61% vs +19.58% for RDVY, so RDVY leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (13 years), IVV annualized +12.55% vs +12.20% for RDVY. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or RDVY?
RDVY has been the more volatile fund at 17.8% annualized versus 14.6% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -33.9% vs RDVY -40.6%.
Should I hold both IVV and RDVY?
IVV and RDVY have a monthly-return correlation of 0.89, 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 RDVY?
94.0% of RDVY's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 94.0% of RDVY's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 64 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 71 in RDVY.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or RDVY?
IVV yields 1.06% while RDVY yields 0.83%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is RDVY better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, RDVY over 1Y. RDVY is less concentrated, with 23.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.