IVV vs RFM
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs RiverNorth Flexible Municipal Income Fund, Inc.
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 | RFM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 3.68% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $97M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 6.92% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 93 | |
| YTD Return | +12.28% | +8.24% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.94% | +13.46% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.81% | +5.32% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.05% | -1.32% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 15.0% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -33.8% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | RiverNorth | |
| Category | Equity | Fixed Income | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Mar 26, 2020 |
IVV vs RFM Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and RiverNorth Flexible Municipal Income Fund, Inc. (RFM) is a ETF from RiverNorth. Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% while RFM returned +13.46%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.28% versus a gain of 8.24% for RFM.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.81% per year against +5.32% for RFM; over five years the annualized figures are +13.05% and -1.32% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +6.98% annualized vs +2.34%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 15.0% for RFM. 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 -33.8% for RFM. 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 0.61. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while RFM charges 3.68%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $368 annually, a gap of $365 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 6.92% for RFM.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and RFM share 0 holdings out of 552 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 RFM?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while RFM charges 3.68%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $365 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or RFM?
Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% vs +13.46% for RFM, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), IVV annualized +6.98% vs +2.34% for RFM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or RFM?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 15.0% for RFM. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs RFM -33.8%.
Should I hold both IVV and RFM?
IVV and RFM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.61, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and RFM?
IVV and RFM share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 552 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or RFM?
IVV yields 1.10% while RFM yields 6.92%, so RFM 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.