IVV vs SMMD
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs iShares Russell 2500 ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. SMMD delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | SMMD | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.15% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $3.6B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 1.05% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 520 | |
| YTD Return | +14.50% | +22.88% | |
| 1Y Return | +22.02% | +30.81% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.80% | +18.30% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.37% | +8.81% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 20.5% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -41.1% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jul 6, 2017 |
IVV vs SMMD Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and iShares Russell 2500 ETF (SMMD) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year IVV returned +22.02% while SMMD returned +30.81%. Year to date, IVV is up 14.50% versus a gain of 22.88% for SMMD.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.80% per year against +18.30% for SMMD; over five years the annualized figures are +13.37% and +8.81% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, SMMD has the edge at +10.71% annualized vs +7.07%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SMMD has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.5% 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 -41.1% for SMMD. 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 0.90. 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 SMMD 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 1.09% against 1.05% for SMMD.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and SMMD share 4 holdings out of 532 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.1% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or SMMD?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while SMMD charges 0.15%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $12 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or SMMD?
Over the past year IVV returned +22.02% vs +30.81% for SMMD, so SMMD leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), IVV annualized +7.07% vs +10.71% for SMMD. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or SMMD?
SMMD has been the more volatile fund at 20.5% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs SMMD -41.1%.
Should I hold both IVV and SMMD?
IVV and SMMD have a monthly-return correlation of 0.90, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and SMMD?
IVV and SMMD share 4 common holdings with a 0.1% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 532 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or SMMD?
IVV yields 1.09% while SMMD yields 1.05%, 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.