IVV vs TLCE

IVV vs TLCE

Which is better, IVV or TLCE?

IVV costs less.

IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 39.0%.

Lower Fees: IVVLess Concentrated: IVV

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

MetricIVVTLCE
Expense Ratio0.03%Best0.30%
AUM$879.1B$36M
Dividend Yield1.09%0.00%
Holdings509160
YTD Return+11.33%Best-2.95%
1Y Return+13.50%-
3Y Return (annualized)+20.45%-
5Y Return (annualized)+11.61%-
Top 10 Weight37.3%Best39.0%
Fund FamilyiShares by BlackRock (US)Thrivent Funds
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap BlendLarge Cap Blend
InceptionMay 15, 2000Oct 21, 2026

Not shown on this pair: Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.

IVV vs TLCE 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 is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.

IVV vs TLCE Performance

iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Thrivent Large Cap Stock ETF (TLCE) is an ETF from Thrivent Funds. Year to date, IVV is up 11.33% versus a loss of 2.95% for TLCE.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Fees and Cost Over Time

IVV charges 0.03% per year while TLCE charges 0.30%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $30 annually, a gap of $27 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 0.00% for TLCE.

Holdings Overlap

IVV already in TLCE68.6%
TLCE already in IVV84.9%

68.6% of IVV's money is in holdings TLCE also owns. 84.9% of TLCE's money is in holdings IVV also owns.

Most of TLCE is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.

104 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 160 in TLCE, against full books of 509 and 160.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 53 positions for TLCE that do not appear in our book for IVV (12.9% of the fund), and 381 for IVV that do not appear in TLCE (30.1%).

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

StockWeight in IVVWeight in TLCEDifference
AAPLApple, Inc7.70%7.61%0.09%
NVDANvidia Corp.7.58%7.49%0.09%
MSFTMicrosoft Corp 4.100 Feb 06 375.93%6.21%0.28%
AMZNAmazon.Com Inc3.61%4.45%0.84%
GOOGLAlphabet Inc2.51%3.10%0.59%
AVGOBroadcom Inc2.37%2.21%0.16%
METAMeta Platform Inc2.08%2.30%0.22%
GOOGAlphabet Inc2.02%2.12%0.10%
LLYEli Lilly & Co.1.74%1.89%0.15%
BRK.ABerkshire Hathaway Inc1.55%1.67%0.12%

84.9% of TLCE 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.

IVVTLCE

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, IVV or TLCE?

IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while TLCE charges 0.30%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $27 a year on a $10,000 investment.

What is the holdings overlap between IVV and TLCE?

84.9% of TLCE's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 84.9% of TLCE's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 104 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 160 in TLCE.

Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or TLCE?

IVV yields 1.09% while TLCE yields 0.00%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is TLCE better than IVV?

IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 39.0%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.