IVV vs RWK
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. RWK delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | RWK | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.39% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $1.4B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 0.99% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 402 | |
| YTD Return | +13.22% | +17.43% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.62% | +24.29% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.17% | +17.03% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.42% | +12.54% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 21.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -56.9% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Feb 20, 2008 |
IVV vs RWK Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Invesco S&P MidCap 400 Revenue ETF (RWK) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year IVV returned +21.62% while RWK returned +24.29%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.22% versus a gain of 17.43% for RWK.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +22.17% per year against +17.03% for RWK; over five years the annualized figures are +13.42% and +12.54% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, RWK has the edge at +10.57% annualized vs +7.02%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
RWK has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 21.6% 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 -56.9% for RWK. 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 0.90. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while RWK charges 0.39%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $39 annually, a gap of $36 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 0.99% for RWK.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and RWK share 1 holdings out of 897 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in IVV | Weight in RWK | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| IPGP | 0.62% | 0.04% | 0.58% |
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or RWK?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while RWK charges 0.39%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $36 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or RWK?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.62% vs +24.29% for RWK, so RWK leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), IVV annualized +7.02% vs +10.57% for RWK. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or RWK?
RWK has been the more volatile fund at 21.6% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs RWK -56.9%.
Should I hold both IVV and RWK?
IVV and RWK have a monthly-return correlation of 0.90, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and RWK?
IVV and RWK share 1 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 897 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or RWK?
IVV yields 1.10% while RWK yields 0.99%, 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.