IVV vs ULVM
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs VictoryShares US Value Momentum ETF
Which is better, IVV or ULVM?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Value.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, ULVM over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. ULVM is less concentrated, with 13.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.9%.
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
| Metric | IVV | ULVM |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.20% |
| AUM | $896.5B | $260M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 1.81% |
| Holdings | 508 | 126 |
| YTD Return | +13.59% | +13.74%Best |
| 1Y Return | +17.54% | +17.70%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +22.46%Best | +21.11% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.28%Best | +11.11% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 16.2%Best | 16.9% |
| Max Drawdown | -33.9%Best | -40.8% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,654Best | $16,934 |
| Top 10 Weight | 38.9% | 13.6%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Victory Capital Management Inc. |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Value |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Oct 24, 2017 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Oct 26, 2017 to Oct 14, 2026 (9 years).
IVV vs ULVM 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 9 years both funds cover.
IVV vs ULVM Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and VictoryShares US Value Momentum ETF (ULVM) is an ETF from Victory Capital Management Inc.. Over the past year IVV returned +17.54% while ULVM returned +17.70%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.59% versus a gain of 13.74% for ULVM.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +22.46% per year against +21.11% for ULVM; over five years the annualized figures are +13.28% and +11.11% respectively. Across the full 9-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +14.06% annualized vs +9.72%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
ULVM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 16.9% compared with 16.2% 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 -40.8% for ULVM. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
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 ULVM charges 0.20%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $20 annually, a gap of $17 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 1.81% for ULVM.
Holdings Overlap
17.9% of IVV's money is in holdings ULVM also owns. 84.5% of ULVM's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
Most of ULVM is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
105 positions in common, counted across the 506 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 125 in ULVM, against full books of 508 and 126.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 16 positions for ULVM that do not appear in our book for IVV (12.7% of the fund), and 395 for IVV that do not appear in ULVM (81.5%).
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
| Stock | Weight in IVV | Weight in ULVM | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc Cap Stk Cl A | 3.00% | 0.78% | 2.22% |
| BRK.BBrk/B | 1.41% | 1.64% | 0.23% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.87% | 0.35% | 1.52% |
| JNJJohnson & Johnson - Common | 0.94% | 1.19% | 0.25% |
| BACBank Of America Corp. | 0.53% | 0.99% | 0.46% |
| EVRGEvergy Inc Sedol Bfmxgr0 | 0.03% | 1.44% | 1.41% |
| LLoews Corp | 0.03% | 1.43% | 1.40% |
| EDConsolidated Edison Inc. | 0.06% | 1.38% | 1.32% |
| AFLAflac Inc. | 0.07% | 1.34% | 1.27% |
| CBChubb Ltd. | 0.18% | 1.20% | 1.02% |
84.5% of ULVM 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.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or ULVM?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while ULVM charges 0.20%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $17 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or ULVM?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.54% vs +17.70% for ULVM, so ULVM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (9 years), IVV annualized +14.06% vs +9.72% for ULVM. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or ULVM?
ULVM has been the more volatile fund at 16.9% annualized versus 16.2% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -33.9% vs ULVM -40.8%.
Should I hold both IVV and ULVM?
IVV and ULVM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, 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 ULVM?
84.5% of ULVM's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 84.5% of ULVM's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 105 positions in common, counted across the 506 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 125 in ULVM.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or ULVM?
IVV yields 1.10% while ULVM yields 1.81%, so ULVM currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is ULVM better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 3Y, 5Y and the full window, ULVM over 1Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. ULVM is less concentrated, with 13.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 38.9%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.