IVV vs TMFC

IVV vs TMFC

Which is better, IVV or TMFC?

Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.

IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, TMFC over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 58.9%.

Lower Fees: IVVHigher Returns: splitLess 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

MetricIVVTMFC
Expense Ratio0.03%Best0.50%
AUM$876.4B$2.1B
Dividend Yield1.06%0.11%
Holdings508104
YTD Return+12.39%Best+11.17%
1Y Return+16.61%Best+13.88%
3Y Return (annualized)+21.38%+25.15%Best
5Y Return (annualized)+13.51%+14.66%Best
Volatility (annualized)16.4%Best18.7%
Max Drawdown-33.9%-33.1%Best
$10,000 over 5 years$18,844$19,818Best
Top 10 Weight37.8%Best58.9%
Fund FamilyiShares by BlackRock (US)Motley Fool Asset Management
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap BlendLarge Cap Growth
InceptionMay 15, 2000Jan 29, 2018

Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jan 30, 2018 to Sep 18, 2026 (8.6 years).

IVV vs TMFC 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 8.6 years both funds cover.

IVV vs TMFC Performance

iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Motley Fool 100 Index ETF (TMFC) is an ETF from Motley Fool Asset Management. Over the past year IVV returned +16.61% while TMFC returned +13.88%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.39% versus a gain of 11.17% for TMFC.

Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.38% per year against +25.15% for TMFC; over five years the annualized figures are +13.51% and +14.66% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, TMFC has the edge at +17.80% annualized vs +13.22%.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns

TMFC has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.7% compared with 16.4% 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 -33.9% for IVV and -33.1% for TMFC. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.

The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.94. 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 TMFC 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 0.11% for TMFC.

Holdings Overlap

IVV already in TMFC52.8%
TMFC already in IVV98.3%

52.8% of IVV's money is in holdings TMFC also owns. 98.3% of TMFC's money is in holdings IVV also owns.

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

89 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 101 in TMFC, against full books of 508 and 104.

What only one of them owns

Measured across the 490 and 101 positions we hold weights for.

IVV holds 393 positions TMFC does not, 45.8% of the fund.

Largest: GOOGL 3.00%, MU 1.63%, LLY 1.38%, XOM 1.01%, JNJ 0.97%

Top Shared Holdings

StockWeight in IVVWeight in TMFCDifference
NVDANvidia Corp8.07%11.13%3.06%
AAPLApple, Inc7.02%9.74%2.72%
MSFTMicrosoft Corp5.69%7.78%2.09%
GOOGAlphabet Inc2.39%8.33%5.94%
AMZNAmazon.Com Inc3.84%5.60%1.76%
AVGOBroadcom Inc2.65%3.69%1.04%
BRK.BBerkshire Hathaway Inc Brk/B Us Equity1.39%3.74%2.35%
JPMJpmorgan Chase1.44%3.31%1.87%
METAMeta Platforms Inc1.90%2.24%0.34%
AMDAdvanced Micro Devices, Inc1.16%2.63%1.47%

98.3% of TMFC 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.

IVVTMFC

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, IVV or TMFC?

IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while TMFC charges 0.50%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $47 a year on a $10,000 investment.

Which performed better, IVV or TMFC?

Over the past year IVV returned +16.61% vs +13.88% for TMFC, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), IVV annualized +13.22% vs +17.80% for TMFC. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which is riskier, IVV or TMFC?

TMFC has been the more volatile fund at 18.7% annualized versus 16.4% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -33.9% vs TMFC -33.1%.

Should I hold both IVV and TMFC?

IVV and TMFC have a monthly-return correlation of 0.94, 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 TMFC?

98.3% of TMFC's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 98.3% of TMFC's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 89 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 101 in TMFC.

Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or TMFC?

IVV yields 1.06% while TMFC yields 0.11%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is TMFC better than IVV?

IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, TMFC over 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.94. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 58.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.