IVV vs SMDV
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Proshares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | SMDV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.40% | |
| AUM | $886.7B | $725M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 2.28% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 101 | |
| YTD Return | +12.64% | +14.92% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.92% | +12.92% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.07% | +10.95% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.62% | +5.77% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 16.0% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -34.1% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | ProShares | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Feb 3, 2015 |
IVV vs SMDV Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Proshares Russell 2000 Dividend Growers ETF (SMDV) is a ETF from ProShares. Over the past year IVV returned +20.92% while SMDV returned +12.92%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.64% versus a gain of 14.92% for SMDV.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.07% per year against +10.95% for SMDV; over five years the annualized figures are +12.62% and +5.77% respectively. Across the full 12-year window we track, SMDV has the edge at +7.92% annualized vs +6.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SMDV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.0% 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 -34.1% for SMDV. 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 0.71. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while SMDV charges 0.40%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $40 annually, a gap of $37 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 2.28% for SMDV.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and SMDV share 1 holdings out of 602 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.2% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in IVV | Weight in SMDV | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NEM | 0.17% | 0.99% | 0.82% |
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or SMDV?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while SMDV charges 0.40%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $37 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or SMDV?
Over the past year IVV returned +20.92% vs +12.92% for SMDV, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (12 years), IVV annualized +6.98% vs +7.92% for SMDV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or SMDV?
SMDV has been the more volatile fund at 16.0% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs SMDV -34.1%.
Should I hold both IVV and SMDV?
IVV and SMDV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.71, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and SMDV?
IVV and SMDV share 1 common holdings with a 0.2% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 602 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or SMDV?
IVV yields 1.10% while SMDV yields 2.28%, so SMDV 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.