IVV vs TUG
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs STF Tactical Growth ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. TUG delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | TUG | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.65% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $32M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 1.91% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 101 | |
| YTD Return | +13.72% | +18.63% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.64% | +25.84% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.55% | +21.98% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.27% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 16.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -22.3% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Gateway Credit Partners | |
| Category | Equity | Alternative | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | May 18, 2022 |
IVV vs TUG Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and STF Tactical Growth ETF (TUG) is a ETF from Gateway Credit Partners. Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% while TUG returned +25.84%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.72% versus a gain of 18.63% for TUG.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.55% per year against +21.98% for TUG. Across the full 4-year window we track, TUG has the edge at +18.52% annualized vs +7.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
TUG has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.6% 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 -22.3% for TUG. 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 0.75. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while TUG charges 0.65%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $65 annually, a gap of $62 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 1.91% for TUG.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and TUG share 87 holdings out of 519 unique holdings combined, representing a 52.8% weight overlap.
High overlap means holding both may not provide much additional diversification.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or TUG?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while TUG charges 0.65%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $62 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or TUG?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% vs +25.84% for TUG, so TUG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (4 years), IVV annualized +7.04% vs +18.52% for TUG. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or TUG?
TUG has been the more volatile fund at 16.6% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs TUG -22.3%.
Should I hold both IVV and TUG?
IVV and TUG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.75, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and TUG?
IVV and TUG share 87 common holdings with a 52.8% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 519 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or TUG?
IVV yields 1.09% while TUG yields 1.91%, so TUG 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.