IVV vs RSSL
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Global X Russell 2000 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. RSSL delivered stronger 1-year returns. RSSL offers more diversification with 1387 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | RSSL | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.08% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $1.5B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 1.23% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 1,918 | |
| YTD Return | +14.50% | +22.58% | |
| 1Y Return | +22.02% | +32.72% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.80% | - | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.37% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 18.4% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -28.2% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Global X by mirae Asset | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jun 4, 2024 |
IVV vs RSSL Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Global X Russell 2000 ETF (RSSL) is a ETF from Global X by mirae Asset. Over the past year IVV returned +22.02% while RSSL returned +32.72%. Year to date, IVV is up 14.50% versus a gain of 22.58% for RSSL.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
RSSL has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.4% 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 -28.2% for RSSL. 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 0.79. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while RSSL charges 0.08%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $8 annually, a gap of $5 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 1.23% for RSSL.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and RSSL share 1 holdings out of 1891 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.2% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in IVV | Weight in RSSL | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NUVL | 0.62% | 0.16% | 0.46% |
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or RSSL?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while RSSL charges 0.08%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $5 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or RSSL?
Over the past year IVV returned +22.02% vs +32.72% for RSSL, so RSSL leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (2 years), IVV annualized +7.07% vs +20.72% for RSSL. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or RSSL?
RSSL has been the more volatile fund at 18.4% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs RSSL -28.2%.
Should I hold both IVV and RSSL?
IVV and RSSL have a monthly-return correlation of 0.79, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and RSSL?
IVV and RSSL share 1 common holdings with a 0.2% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 1891 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or RSSL?
IVV yields 1.09% while RSSL yields 1.23%, so RSSL 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.