IVV vs RWIN
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Rayliant NxtGen Multifactor International Equity ETF
Which is better, IVV or RWIN?
IVV costs less.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. RWIN is less concentrated, with 20.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%.
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 | RWIN |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.42% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $21M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 0.96% |
| Holdings | 508 | 166 |
| YTD Return | +13.32%Best | +5.42% |
| 1Y Return | +17.08% | - |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.72% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.20% | - |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.8% | 20.4%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Rayliant Asset Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Apr 8, 2026 |
Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.
IVV vs RWIN 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
IVV vs RWIN Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Rayliant NxtGen Multifactor International Equity ETF (RWIN) is an ETF from Rayliant Asset Management. Year to date, IVV is up 13.32% versus a gain of 5.42% for RWIN.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while RWIN charges 0.42%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $42 annually, a gap of $39 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 0.96% for RWIN.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 490 holdings in IVV and 166 in RWIN, totalling 99.3% and 99.9% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 166 in RWIN, against full books of 508 and 166.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 3 positions for RWIN that do not appear in our book for IVV (2.1% of the fund), and 482 for IVV that do not appear in RWIN (98.6%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and RWIN you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or RWIN?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while RWIN charges 0.42%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $39 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or RWIN?
IVV yields 1.06% while RWIN yields 0.96%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is RWIN better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. RWIN is less concentrated, with 20.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.