IVV vs SRV
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs NXG Cushing Midstream Energy Fund
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. SRV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | SRV | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 4.25% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $307M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 16.54% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 57 | |
| YTD Return | +13.25% | +21.47% | |
| 1Y Return | +19.95% | +23.71% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.26% | +18.84% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.82% | +25.91% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 39.5% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -99.6% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Cushing Investment Management | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Aug 27, 2007 |
IVV vs SRV Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and NXG Cushing Midstream Energy Fund (SRV) is a ETF from Cushing Investment Management. Over the past year IVV returned +19.95% while SRV returned +23.71%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.25% versus a gain of 21.47% for SRV.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.26% per year against +18.84% for SRV; over five years the annualized figures are +12.82% and +25.91% respectively. Across the full 19-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.01% annualized vs -15.10%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SRV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 39.5% 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 -99.6% for SRV. 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 0.47. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while SRV charges 4.25%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $425 annually, a gap of $422 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 16.54% for SRV.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and SRV share 14 holdings out of 541 unique holdings combined, representing a 1.5% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or SRV?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while SRV charges 4.25%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $422 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or SRV?
Over the past year IVV returned +19.95% vs +23.71% for SRV, so SRV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (19 years), IVV annualized +7.01% vs -15.10% for SRV. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or SRV?
SRV has been the more volatile fund at 39.5% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs SRV -99.6%.
Should I hold both IVV and SRV?
IVV and SRV have a monthly-return correlation of 0.47, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and SRV?
IVV and SRV share 14 common holdings with a 1.5% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 541 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or SRV?
IVV yields 1.10% while SRV yields 16.54%, so SRV 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.