IVV vs RSPM
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Materials ETF
Which is better, IVV or RSPM?
Each has led over a different period.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, RSPM over 1Y. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 43.9%.
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 | RSPM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.40% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $188M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 1.73% |
| Holdings | 508 | 28 |
| YTD Return | +11.57% | +13.71%Best |
| 1Y Return | +17.57% | +20.39%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.71%Best | +8.88% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.80%Best | +5.09% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.4%Best | 21.2% |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5%Best | -62.5% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,262Best | $12,818 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.9%Best | 43.9% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Nov 1, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 7, 2006 to Sep 10, 2026 (19.8 years).
IVV vs RSPM 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 19.8 years both funds cover.
IVV vs RSPM Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight Materials ETF (RSPM) is an ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% while RSPM returned +20.39%. Year to date, IVV is up 11.57% versus a gain of 13.71% for RSPM.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +20.71% per year against +8.88% for RSPM; over five years the annualized figures are +12.80% and +5.09% respectively. Across the full 20-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +9.38% annualized vs +7.76%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
RSPM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 21.2% compared with 15.4% 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 -62.5% for RSPM. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.85. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while RSPM charges 0.40%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $40 annually, a gap of $37 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 1.73% for RSPM.
Holdings Overlap
1.6% of IVV's money is in holdings RSPM also owns. 91.7% of RSPM's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
Most of RSPM is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
23 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 26 in RSPM, against full books of 508 and 28.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 2 positions for RSPM that do not appear in our book for IVV (4.7% of the fund), and 472 for IVV that do not appear in RSPM (97.7%).
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 RSPM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| IPInternational Paper Co. | 0.03% | 4.94% | 4.91% |
| AMCRAmcor Plc Ordinary Shares | 0.03% | 4.59% | 4.56% |
| SHWSherwin Williams Co/the | 0.13% | 4.42% | 4.29% |
| PKGPackaging Corp. Of America | 0.03% | 4.38% | 4.35% |
| BALLBall Corp. | 0.03% | 4.33% | 4.30% |
| MOSMosaic Co. | 0.01% | 4.26% | 4.25% |
| ECLEcolab, Inc. | 0.11% | 4.10% | 3.99% |
| FCXFreeport-McMoran Copper & Gold Inc | 0.15% | 4.03% | 3.88% |
| NUENucor Corp. | 0.09% | 4.07% | 3.98% |
| AVYAvery Dennison Corp. | 0.02% | 4.13% | 4.11% |
91.7% of RSPM 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 RSPM?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while RSPM charges 0.40%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $37 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or RSPM?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% vs +20.39% for RSPM, so RSPM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (20 years), IVV annualized +9.38% vs +7.76% for RSPM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or RSPM?
RSPM has been the more volatile fund at 21.2% annualized versus 15.4% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs RSPM -62.5%.
Should I hold both IVV and RSPM?
IVV and RSPM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.85, 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 RSPM?
91.7% of RSPM's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 91.7% of RSPM's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 23 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 26 in RSPM.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or RSPM?
IVV yields 1.06% while RSPM yields 1.73%, so RSPM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is RSPM better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, RSPM over 1Y. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 43.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.