IVV vs STXD
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Strive 1000 Dividend Growth ETF
Which is better, IVV or STXD?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Value.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.8%.
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 | STXD |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.35% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $66M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 1.11% |
| Holdings | 508 | 181 |
| YTD Return | +12.27%Best | +4.17% |
| 1Y Return | +17.04%Best | +6.25% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.24%Best | +13.84% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.08% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 13.0% | 11.0%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -18.8% | -14.9%Best |
| $10,000 over 3.8 years | $19,987Best | $15,767 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.8%Best | 38.8% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Strive Asset Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Nov 10, 2022 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Nov 11, 2022 to Sep 17, 2026 (3.8 years).
IVV vs STXD 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 covers the 3.8 years both funds cover.
IVV vs STXD Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Strive 1000 Dividend Growth ETF (STXD) is an ETF from Strive Asset Management. Over the past year IVV returned +17.04% while STXD returned +6.25%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.27% versus a gain of 4.17% for STXD.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.24% per year against +13.84% for STXD. Across the full 4-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +19.99% annualized vs +12.73%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 13.0% compared with 11.0% for STXD. 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 -18.8% for IVV and -14.9% for STXD. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
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 STXD charges 0.35%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $35 annually, a gap of $32 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 1.11% for STXD.
Holdings Overlap
27.9% of IVV's money is in holdings STXD also owns. 94.2% of STXD's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
Most of STXD is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
120 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 180 in STXD, against full books of 508 and 181.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 58 positions for STXD that do not appear in our book for IVV (5.6% of the fund), and 363 for IVV that do not appear in STXD (70.8%).
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.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in IVV | Weight in STXD | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.69% | 6.77% | 1.08% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.65% | 4.63% | 1.98% |
| JPMJpmorgan Chase | 1.44% | 5.27% | 3.83% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 1.38% | 5.14% | 3.76% |
| VVisa Inc Class A | 0.95% | 4.15% | 3.20% |
| MAMastercard Inc | 0.72% | 2.98% | 2.26% |
| COSTCostco Wholesale Corp. | 0.63% | 2.76% | 2.13% |
| LRCXLam Research Corp | 0.57% | 2.49% | 1.92% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 0.55% | 2.40% | 1.85% |
| HDHome Depot Inc/The | 0.49% | 2.16% | 1.67% |
94.2% of STXD is already inside IVV.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or STXD?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while STXD charges 0.35%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $32 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or STXD?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.04% vs +6.25% for STXD, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), IVV annualized +19.99% vs +12.73% for STXD. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or STXD?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 13.0% annualized versus 11.0% for STXD. Worst drawdown: IVV -18.8% vs STXD -14.9%.
Should I hold both IVV and STXD?
IVV and STXD have a monthly-return correlation of 0.90, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and STXD?
94.2% of STXD's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 94.2% of STXD's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 120 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 180 in STXD.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or STXD?
IVV yields 1.06% while STXD yields 1.11%, so STXD currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is STXD better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.