IVV vs RXI
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs iShares Global Consumer Discretionary ETF
Which is better, IVV or RXI?
IVV has been ahead.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.9%.
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 | RXI |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.37% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $254M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 1.43% |
| Holdings | 508 | 149 |
| YTD Return | +11.57%Best | -7.31% |
| 1Y Return | +17.57%Best | -3.98% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.71%Best | +8.33% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.80%Best | +3.48% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.3%Best | 18.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5%Best | -62.0% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,262Best | $11,865 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.9%Best | 46.9% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Sep 12, 2006 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 21, 2006 to Sep 10, 2026 (20 years).
IVV vs RXI 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 20 years both funds cover.
IVV vs RXI Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and iShares Global Consumer Discretionary ETF (RXI) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% while RXI returned -3.98%. Year to date, IVV is up 11.57% versus a loss of 7.31% for RXI.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +20.71% per year against +8.33% for RXI; over five years the annualized figures are +12.80% and +3.48% respectively. Across the full 20-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +9.56% annualized vs +7.06%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
RXI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.3% compared with 15.3% 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 -62.0% for RXI. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.91. 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 RXI charges 0.37%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $37 annually, a gap of $34 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 1.43% for RXI.
Holdings Overlap
9.3% of IVV's money is in holdings RXI also owns. 59.2% of RXI's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
47 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 132 in RXI, against full books of 508 and 149.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 1 positions for RXI that do not appear in our book for IVV (1.2% of the fund), and 449 for IVV that do not appear in RXI (90.0%).
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 RXI | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 4.01% | 16.58% | 12.57% |
| TSLATesla Inc | 1.36% | 5.62% | 4.26% |
| HDHome Depot Inc/The | 0.53% | 4.68% | 4.15% |
| MCDMcdonald'S Corp | 0.29% | 2.90% | 2.61% |
| TJXTjx Cos., Inc. | 0.27% | 2.64% | 2.37% |
| BKNGBooking Holdings, Inc. | 0.24% | 2.39% | 2.15% |
| LOWLowes Cos., Inc. | 0.19% | 1.84% | 1.65% |
| SBUXStarbucks Corp | 0.18% | 1.80% | 1.62% |
| ROSTRoss Stores, Inc. | 0.12% | 1.22% | 1.10% |
| GMGeneral Motors Co. | 0.12% | 1.20% | 1.08% |
59.2% of RXI 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 RXI?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while RXI charges 0.37%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $34 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or RXI?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% vs -3.98% for RXI, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (20 years), IVV annualized +9.56% vs +7.06% for RXI. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or RXI?
RXI has been the more volatile fund at 18.3% annualized versus 15.3% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs RXI -62.0%.
Should I hold both IVV and RXI?
IVV and RXI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and RXI?
59.2% of RXI's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 59.2% of RXI's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 47 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 132 in RXI.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or RXI?
IVV yields 1.06% while RXI yields 1.43%, so RXI currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is RXI better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 46.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.