IVV vs SCO
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs ProShares UltraShort Bloomberg Crude Oil
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 | SCO | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.95% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $772M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 0.00% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 5 | |
| YTD Return | +13.72% | -67.07% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.64% | -63.58% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.55% | -30.45% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.27% | -41.20% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 114.5% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -99.7% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | ProShares | |
| Category | Equity | Alternative | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Nov 24, 2008 |
IVV vs SCO Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and ProShares UltraShort Bloomberg Crude Oil (SCO) is a ETF from ProShares. Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% while SCO returned -63.58%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.72% versus a loss of 67.07% for SCO.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.55% per year against -30.45% for SCO; over five years the annualized figures are +13.27% and -41.20% respectively. Across the full 18-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.04% annualized vs -19.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SCO has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 114.5% 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 -99.7% for SCO. 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 -0.22. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while SCO charges 0.95%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $95 annually, a gap of $92 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 0.00% for SCO.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and SCO share 0 holdings out of 506 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or SCO?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while SCO charges 0.95%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $92 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or SCO?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% vs -63.58% for SCO, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (18 years), IVV annualized +7.04% vs -19.20% for SCO. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or SCO?
SCO has been the more volatile fund at 114.5% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs SCO -99.7%.
Should I hold both IVV and SCO?
IVV and SCO have a monthly-return correlation of -0.22, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and SCO?
IVV and SCO share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 506 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or SCO?
IVV yields 1.09% while SCO yields 0.00%, 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.