IVV vs SMN
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs ProShares UltraShort Materials
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 | SMN | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.95% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $4M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 3.53% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 6 | |
| YTD Return | +12.28% | -24.44% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.94% | -27.95% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.81% | -34.44% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.05% | -28.08% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 45.4% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -100.0% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | ProShares | |
| Category | Equity | Alternative | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jan 30, 2007 |
IVV vs SMN Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and ProShares UltraShort Materials (SMN) is a ETF from ProShares. Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% while SMN returned -27.95%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.28% versus a loss of 24.44% for SMN.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.81% per year against -34.44% for SMN; over five years the annualized figures are +13.05% and -28.08% respectively. Across the full 20-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +6.98% annualized vs -32.20%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SMN has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 45.4% 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 -100.0% for SMN. 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 -0.76. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while SMN 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 1.10% against 3.53% for SMN.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or SMN?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while SMN 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 SMN?
Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% vs -27.95% for SMN, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (20 years), IVV annualized +6.98% vs -32.20% for SMN. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or SMN?
SMN has been the more volatile fund at 45.4% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs SMN -100.0%.
Should I hold both IVV and SMN?
IVV and SMN have a monthly-return correlation of -0.76, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or SMN?
IVV yields 1.10% while SMN yields 3.53%, so SMN 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.