IVV vs SABA
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Saba Capital Income & Opportunities Fund II
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | SABA | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.71% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $255M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 8.41% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 740 | |
| YTD Return | +13.80% | +5.52% | |
| 1Y Return | +23.01% | -1.75% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.77% | +9.94% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.39% | +3.58% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 13.2% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -62.0% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Saba Capital | |
| Category | Equity | Fixed Income | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Mar 17, 1988 |
IVV vs SABA Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Saba Capital Income & Opportunities Fund II (SABA) is a ETF from Saba Capital. Over the past year IVV returned +23.01% while SABA returned -1.75%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.80% versus a gain of 5.52% for SABA.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.77% per year against +9.94% for SABA; over five years the annualized figures are +13.39% and +3.58% respectively. Across the full 26-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.04% annualized vs -0.17%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 13.2% for SABA. 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 SABA. 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 0.42. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while SABA charges 0.71%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $71 annually, a gap of $68 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 8.41% for SABA.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and SABA share 76 holdings out of 808 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.2% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or SABA?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while SABA charges 0.71%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $68 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or SABA?
Over the past year IVV returned +23.01% vs -1.75% for SABA, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (26 years), IVV annualized +7.04% vs -0.17% for SABA. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or SABA?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 13.2% for SABA. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs SABA -62.0%.
Should I hold both IVV and SABA?
IVV and SABA have a monthly-return correlation of 0.42, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and SABA?
IVV and SABA share 76 common holdings with a 0.2% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 808 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or SABA?
IVV yields 1.09% while SABA yields 8.41%, so SABA 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.