IVV vs RMCA
IVV vs RMCA
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | RMCA | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.55% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $19M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 4.72% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 65 | |
| YTD Return | +13.80% | +2.09% | |
| 1Y Return | +23.70% | +7.38% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.49% | - | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.43% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 5.0% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -6.3% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Rockefeller Capital Management | |
| Category | Equity | Tax Preferred | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Aug 12, 2024 |
IVV vs RMCA Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Rockefeller California Municipal Bond ETF (RMCA) is a ETF from Rockefeller Capital Management. Over the past year IVV returned +23.70% while RMCA returned +7.38%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.80% versus a gain of 2.09% for RMCA.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 5.0% for RMCA. 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 -6.3% for RMCA. 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 0.45. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while RMCA charges 0.55%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $55 annually, a gap of $52 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 4.72% for RMCA.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and RMCA share 0 holdings out of 525 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 RMCA?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while RMCA charges 0.55%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $52 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or RMCA?
Over the past year IVV returned +23.70% vs +7.38% for RMCA, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), IVV annualized +7.05% vs +2.08% for RMCA. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or RMCA?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 5.0% for RMCA. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs RMCA -6.3%.
Should I hold both IVV and RMCA?
IVV and RMCA have a monthly-return correlation of 0.45, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and RMCA?
IVV and RMCA share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 525 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or RMCA?
IVV yields 1.09% while RMCA yields 4.72%, so RMCA 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.