IVV vs TMFS
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth 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 | TMFS | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.85% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $60M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 0.00% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 34 | |
| YTD Return | +14.29% | +7.47% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.79% | +7.97% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.19% | +8.80% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.28% | -0.20% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 23.9% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -48.8% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Motley Fool Asset Management | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Oct 30, 2018 |
IVV vs TMFS Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Motley Fool Small-Cap Growth ETF (TMFS) is a ETF from Motley Fool Asset Management. Over the past year IVV returned +21.79% while TMFS returned +7.97%. Year to date, IVV is up 14.29% versus a gain of 7.47% for TMFS.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +22.19% per year against +8.80% for TMFS; over five years the annualized figures are +13.28% and -0.20% respectively. Across the full 8-year window we track, TMFS has the edge at +9.38% annualized vs +7.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
TMFS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 23.9% 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 -48.8% for TMFS. 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 0.78. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while TMFS 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 1.10% against 0.00% for TMFS.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and TMFS share 1 holdings out of 536 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.6% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in IVV | Weight in TMFS | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| IPGP | 0.62% | 1.83% | 1.21% |
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or TMFS?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while TMFS 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 TMFS?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.79% vs +7.97% for TMFS, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (8 years), IVV annualized +7.06% vs +9.38% for TMFS. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or TMFS?
TMFS has been the more volatile fund at 23.9% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs TMFS -48.8%.
Should I hold both IVV and TMFS?
IVV and TMFS have a monthly-return correlation of 0.78, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and TMFS?
IVV and TMFS share 1 common holdings with a 0.6% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 536 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or TMFS?
IVV yields 1.10% while TMFS 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.