IVV vs SWZ
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Total Return Securities Fund
Which is better, IVV or SWZ?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y and 5Y, SWZ over the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 61.1%.
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 | SWZ |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 1.62% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $96M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 0.00% |
| Holdings | 508 | 27 |
| YTD Return | +12.27%Best | -5.22% |
| 1Y Return | +17.04%Best | -3.67% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.24%Best | +6.95% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.08%Best | +3.12% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1%Best | 17.4% |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5%Best | -57.7% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,490Best | $11,660 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.8%Best | 61.1% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Total Return Securities Fund |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Aug 27, 1987 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: May 19, 2000 to Sep 17, 2026 (26.3 years).
IVV vs SWZ 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 26.3 years both funds cover.
IVV vs SWZ Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Total Return Securities Fund (SWZ) is an ETF from Total Return Securities Fund. Over the past year IVV returned +17.04% while SWZ returned -3.67%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.27% versus a loss of 5.22% for SWZ.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.24% per year against +6.95% for SWZ; over five years the annualized figures are +13.08% and +3.12% respectively. Across the full 26-year window we track, SWZ has the edge at +8.01% annualized vs +6.96%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
SWZ has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.4% 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 -57.7% for SWZ. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.66. They move together some of the time, and apart the rest.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while SWZ charges 1.62%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $162 annually, a gap of $159 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 0.00% for SWZ.
Holdings Overlap
0.4% of IVV's money is in holdings SWZ also owns. 11.4% of SWZ's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
SWZ and IVV share little of their money.
The two holdings books were reported 153 days apart, IVV as of Aug 31, 2026 and SWZ as of Mar 31, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.
3 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 24 in SWZ, against full books of 508 and 27.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 16 positions for SWZ that do not appear in our book for IVV (72.7% of the fund), and 479 for IVV that do not appear in SWZ (98.2%).
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 SWZ 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 SWZ?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while SWZ charges 1.62%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $159 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or SWZ?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.04% vs -3.67% for SWZ, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (26 years), IVV annualized +6.96% vs +8.01% for SWZ. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or SWZ?
SWZ has been the more volatile fund at 17.4% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs SWZ -57.7%.
Should I hold both IVV and SWZ?
IVV and SWZ have a monthly-return correlation of 0.66, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and SWZ?
11.4% of SWZ's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 11.4% of SWZ's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 3 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 24 in SWZ.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or SWZ?
IVV yields 1.06% while SWZ yields 0.00%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is SWZ better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y and 5Y, SWZ over the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 61.1%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.