IVV vs TGRW
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs T. Rowe Price Growth Stock ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | TGRW | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.52% | |
| AUM | $886.7B | $1.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 0.00% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 69 | |
| YTD Return | +12.64% | +2.52% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.92% | +8.49% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.07% | +18.00% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.62% | +6.59% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 20.0% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -43.3% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | T.Rowe Price | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Aug 4, 2020 |
IVV vs TGRW Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and T. Rowe Price Growth Stock ETF (TGRW) is a ETF from T.Rowe Price. Over the past year IVV returned +20.92% while TGRW returned +8.49%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.64% versus a gain of 2.52% for TGRW.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.07% per year against +18.00% for TGRW; over five years the annualized figures are +12.62% and +6.59% respectively. Across the full 6-year window we track, TGRW has the edge at +10.87% annualized vs +6.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
TGRW has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 20.0% 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 -43.3% for TGRW. 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 0.92. 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 TGRW charges 0.52%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $52 annually, a gap of $49 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 0.00% for TGRW.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and TGRW share 52 holdings out of 522 unique holdings combined, representing a 43.8% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or TGRW?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while TGRW charges 0.52%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $49 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or TGRW?
Over the past year IVV returned +20.92% vs +8.49% for TGRW, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (6 years), IVV annualized +6.98% vs +10.87% for TGRW. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or TGRW?
TGRW has been the more volatile fund at 20.0% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs TGRW -43.3%.
Should I hold both IVV and TGRW?
IVV and TGRW have a monthly-return correlation of 0.92, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and TGRW?
IVV and TGRW share 52 common holdings with a 43.8% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 522 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or TGRW?
IVV yields 1.10% while TGRW 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.