IVV vs TMFG
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | TMFG | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.85% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $349M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 0.27% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 46 | |
| YTD Return | +13.43% | +6.52% | |
| 1Y Return | +22.61% | +5.85% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.47% | +12.40% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.26% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 17.3% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -33.7% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Motley Fool Asset Management | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jun 17, 2014 |
IVV vs TMFG Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Motley Fool Global Opportunities ETF (TMFG) is a ETF from Motley Fool Asset Management. Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% while TMFG returned +5.85%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.43% versus a gain of 6.52% for TMFG.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.47% per year against +12.40% for TMFG. Across the full 5-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.03% annualized vs +4.38%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
TMFG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.3% 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 -33.7% for TMFG. 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 0.91. 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 TMFG charges 0.85%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $85 annually, a gap of $82 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 0.27% for TMFG.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and TMFG share 15 holdings out of 531 unique holdings combined, representing a 9.1% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or TMFG?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while TMFG charges 0.85%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $82 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or TMFG?
Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% vs +5.85% for TMFG, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (5 years), IVV annualized +7.03% vs +4.38% for TMFG. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or TMFG?
TMFG has been the more volatile fund at 17.3% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs TMFG -33.7%.
Should I hold both IVV and TMFG?
IVV and TMFG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, 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 TMFG?
IVV and TMFG share 15 common holdings with a 9.1% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 531 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or TMFG?
IVV yields 1.09% while TMFG yields 0.27%, 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.