IVV vs UMI
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs USCF Midstream Energy Income ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. UMI delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | UMI | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.69% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $509M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 5.83% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 25 | |
| YTD Return | +12.28% | +26.68% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.94% | +30.78% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.81% | +26.79% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.05% | +24.09% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 17.5% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -20.1% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | USCF Investments | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Mar 24, 2021 |
IVV vs UMI Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and USCF Midstream Energy Income ETF (UMI) is a ETF from USCF Investments. Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% while UMI returned +30.78%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.28% versus a gain of 26.68% for UMI.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.81% per year against +26.79% for UMI; over five years the annualized figures are +13.05% and +24.09% respectively. Across the full 5-year window we track, UMI has the edge at +24.28% annualized vs +6.98%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
UMI has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 17.5% 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 -20.1% for UMI. 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 0.50. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while UMI charges 0.69%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $69 annually, a gap of $66 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 5.83% for UMI.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and UMI share 4 holdings out of 524 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.4% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or UMI?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while UMI charges 0.69%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $66 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or UMI?
Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% vs +30.78% for UMI, so UMI leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (5 years), IVV annualized +6.98% vs +24.28% for UMI. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or UMI?
UMI has been the more volatile fund at 17.5% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs UMI -20.1%.
Should I hold both IVV and UMI?
IVV and UMI have a monthly-return correlation of 0.50, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and UMI?
IVV and UMI share 4 common holdings with a 0.4% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 524 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or UMI?
IVV yields 1.10% while UMI yields 5.83%, so UMI 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.