IVV vs SMNG
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs xETFs Samsung Group ETF
Which is better, IVV or SMNG?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 77.6%.
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 | SMNG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.49% |
| AUM | $879.1B | $2M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 509 | 18 |
| YTD Return | +11.33%Best | -6.18% |
| 1Y Return | +13.50% | - |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.45% | - |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +11.61% | - |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.3%Best | 77.6% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | WallStreetX ETFs, Inc. |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Oct 22, 2026 |
Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.
IVV vs SMNG 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.
IVV vs SMNG Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and xETFs Samsung Group ETF (SMNG) is an ETF from WallStreetX ETFs, Inc.. Year to date, IVV is up 11.33% versus a loss of 6.18% for SMNG.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while SMNG charges 0.49%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $49 annually, a gap of $46 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 0.00% for SMNG.
Holdings Overlap
We hold position weights for 490 holdings in IVV and 16 in SMNG, totalling 99.2% and 96.9% of the two funds. The two books name no position in common, so there is no overlap percentage to show.
0 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 16 in SMNG, against full books of 509 and 18.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 0 positions for SMNG that do not appear in our book for IVV (0.0% of the fund), and 485 for IVV that do not appear in SMNG (98.8%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and SMNG you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or SMNG?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while SMNG charges 0.49%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $46 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or SMNG?
IVV yields 1.09% while SMNG yields 0.00%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is SMNG better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 77.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.