IVV vs ROM
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs ProShares Ultra Technology
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. ROM delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | ROM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.95% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $1.3B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 0.07% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 90 | |
| YTD Return | +13.51% | +56.97% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.65% | +81.74% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.94% | +52.15% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.95% | +21.50% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 41.9% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -83.8% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | ProShares | |
| Category | Equity | Alternative | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jan 30, 2007 |
IVV vs ROM Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and ProShares Ultra Technology (ROM) is a ETF from ProShares. Over the past year IVV returned +20.65% while ROM returned +81.74%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.51% versus a gain of 56.97% for ROM.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.94% per year against +52.15% for ROM; over five years the annualized figures are +12.95% and +21.50% respectively. Across the full 20-year window we track, ROM has the edge at +24.09% annualized vs +7.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ROM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 41.9% 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 -83.8% for ROM. 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 ROM charges 0.95%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $95 annually, a gap of $92 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 0.07% for ROM.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and ROM share 73 holdings out of 507 unique holdings combined, representing a 36.5% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or ROM?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while ROM charges 0.95%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $92 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or ROM?
Over the past year IVV returned +20.65% vs +81.74% for ROM, so ROM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (20 years), IVV annualized +7.02% vs +24.09% for ROM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or ROM?
ROM has been the more volatile fund at 41.9% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs ROM -83.8%.
Should I hold both IVV and ROM?
IVV and ROM 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 ROM?
IVV and ROM share 73 common holdings with a 36.5% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 507 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or ROM?
IVV yields 1.10% while ROM yields 0.07%, so IVV 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.