IVV vs SEIV
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs SEI QiM US Large Cap Value Active ETF
Which is better, IVV or SEIV?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Value.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. SEIV led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. SEIV is less concentrated, with 25.4% 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 | SEIV |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.15% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $1.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 1.05% |
| Holdings | 508 | 124 |
| YTD Return | +12.39% | +20.06%Best |
| 1Y Return | +16.61% | +29.55%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.38% | +26.48%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.51% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.3%Best | 16.3% |
| Max Drawdown | -18.8% | -18.2%Best |
| $10,000 over 4.3 years | $20,576 | $21,435Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.8% | 25.4%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | SEI EXCHANGE TRADED FUNDS |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | May 18, 2022 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 4.3 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: May 18, 2022 to Sep 18, 2026 (4.3 years).
IVV vs SEIV 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 4.3 years both funds cover.
IVV vs SEIV Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and SEI QiM US Large Cap Value Active ETF (SEIV) is an ETF from SEI EXCHANGE TRADED FUNDS. Over the past year IVV returned +16.61% while SEIV returned +29.55%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.39% versus a gain of 20.06% for SEIV.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.38% per year against +26.48% for SEIV. Across the full 4-year window we track, SEIV has the edge at +19.40% annualized vs +18.27%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SEIV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.3% 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 -18.8% for IVV and -18.2% for SEIV. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.92. 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 SEIV charges 0.15%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $15 annually, a gap of $12 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 1.05% for SEIV.
Holdings Overlap
36.1% of IVV's money is in holdings SEIV also owns. 71.5% of SEIV's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
Most of SEIV is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
64 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 123 in SEIV, against full books of 508 and 124.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 56 positions for SEIV that do not appear in our book for IVV (25.9% of the fund), and 418 for IVV that do not appear in SEIV (62.5%).
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 SEIV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.07% | 3.74% | 4.33% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 7.02% | 2.96% | 4.06% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.69% | 2.17% | 3.52% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc | 2.39% | 2.46% | 0.07% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.84% | 0.39% | 3.45% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.63% | 2.45% | 0.82% |
| VZVerizon Communic | 0.32% | 2.53% | 2.21% |
| GMGeneral Motors Co | 0.12% | 2.40% | 2.28% |
| CCitigroup Inc. | 0.34% | 2.15% | 1.81% |
| CAHCardinal Health Inc. | 0.08% | 2.33% | 2.25% |
71.5% of SEIV 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 SEIV?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while SEIV charges 0.15%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $12 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or SEIV?
Over the past year IVV returned +16.61% vs +29.55% for SEIV, so SEIV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), IVV annualized +18.27% vs +19.40% for SEIV. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or SEIV?
SEIV has been the more volatile fund at 16.3% annualized versus 15.3% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -18.8% vs SEIV -18.2%.
Should I hold both IVV and SEIV?
IVV and SEIV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.92, 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 SEIV?
71.5% of SEIV's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 71.5% of SEIV's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 64 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 123 in SEIV.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or SEIV?
IVV yields 1.06% while SEIV yields 1.05%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is SEIV better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. SEIV led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. SEIV is less concentrated, with 25.4% 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.