IVV vs TDVG
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF
Which is better, IVV or TDVG?
IVV has been ahead.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.93. TDVG is less concentrated, with 29.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.9%.
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 | TDVG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.50% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $1.5B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 0.96% |
| Holdings | 508 | 96 |
| YTD Return | +11.57%Best | +8.98% |
| 1Y Return | +17.57%Best | +14.50% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.71%Best | +14.96% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.80%Best | +9.43% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.4% | 13.5%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -24.5% | -19.2%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,262Best | $15,692 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.9% | 29.7%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | T.Rowe Price |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Aug 4, 2020 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Aug 5, 2020 to Sep 10, 2026 (6.1 years).
IVV vs TDVG 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 6.1 years both funds cover.
IVV vs TDVG Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and T. Rowe Price Dividend Growth ETF (TDVG) is an ETF from T.Rowe Price. Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% while TDVG returned +14.50%. Year to date, IVV is up 11.57% versus a gain of 8.98% for TDVG.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +20.71% per year against +14.96% for TDVG; over five years the annualized figures are +12.80% and +9.43% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +15.95% annualized vs +12.66%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.4% compared with 13.5% for TDVG. 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 -24.5% for IVV and -19.2% for TDVG. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.93. 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 TDVG charges 0.50%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $50 annually, a gap of $47 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 0.96% for TDVG.
Holdings Overlap
47.9% of IVV's money is in holdings TDVG also owns. 95.5% of TDVG's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
Most of TDVG is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
93 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 96 in TDVG, against full books of 508 and 96.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 0 positions for TDVG that do not appear in our book for IVV (0.0% of the fund), and 402 for IVV that do not appear in TDVG (51.5%).
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 TDVG | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| AAPLApple, Inc | 6.86% | 5.41% | 1.45% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp 4.100 Feb 06 37 | 5.44% | 3.86% | 1.58% |
| NVDANvidia Corp. | 7.98% | 0.41% | 7.57% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.98% | 3.68% | 0.70% |
| JPMJpmorgan Chase & Co. | 1.45% | 3.08% | 1.63% |
| VVisa Inc | 0.92% | 2.73% | 1.81% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 1.39% | 1.86% | 0.47% |
| GEGeneral Electric Co. | 0.60% | 2.46% | 1.86% |
| KLACKla Corp. | 0.38% | 2.68% | 2.30% |
| BACBank Of America Corp. | 0.62% | 1.91% | 1.29% |
95.5% of TDVG 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 TDVG?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while TDVG charges 0.50%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $47 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or TDVG?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% vs +14.50% for TDVG, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), IVV annualized +15.95% vs +12.66% for TDVG. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or TDVG?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.4% annualized versus 13.5% for TDVG. Worst drawdown: IVV -24.5% vs TDVG -19.2%.
Should I hold both IVV and TDVG?
IVV and TDVG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.93, 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 TDVG?
95.5% of TDVG's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 95.5% of TDVG's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 93 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 96 in TDVG.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or TDVG?
IVV yields 1.06% while TDVG yields 0.96%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is TDVG better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.93. TDVG is less concentrated, with 29.7% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.