IVV vs TAN
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Invesco Solar ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. TAN delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | TAN | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.70% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $1.5B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 0.00% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 42 | |
| YTD Return | +13.72% | +1.41% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.64% | +41.89% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.55% | -5.48% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.27% | -9.35% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 43.7% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -95.3% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Apr 15, 2008 |
IVV vs TAN Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Invesco Solar ETF (TAN) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% while TAN returned +41.89%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.72% versus a gain of 1.41% for TAN.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.55% per year against -5.48% for TAN; over five years the annualized figures are +13.27% and -9.35% respectively. Across the full 18-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.04% annualized vs -6.87%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
TAN has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 43.7% 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 -95.3% for TAN. 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 0.62. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while TAN charges 0.70%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $70 annually, a gap of $67 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 0.00% for TAN.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and TAN share 1 holdings out of 539 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in IVV | Weight in TAN | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| FSLR | 0.03% | 9.42% | 9.39% |
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or TAN?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while TAN charges 0.70%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $67 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or TAN?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% vs +41.89% for TAN, so TAN leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (18 years), IVV annualized +7.04% vs -6.87% for TAN. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or TAN?
TAN has been the more volatile fund at 43.7% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs TAN -95.3%.
Should I hold both IVV and TAN?
IVV and TAN have a monthly-return correlation of 0.62, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and TAN?
IVV and TAN share 1 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 539 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or TAN?
IVV yields 1.09% while TAN yields 0.00%, so IVV 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.