IVV vs VBF
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Invesco Bond Fund
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. VBF offers more diversification with 1017 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | VBF | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.54% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $4,400.74 | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 5.07% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 1,492 | |
| YTD Return | +13.80% | -1.13% | |
| 1Y Return | +23.70% | +0.15% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.49% | +5.16% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.43% | -1.89% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 10.5% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -41.6% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Invesco (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Fixed Income | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Oct 28, 1970 |
IVV vs VBF Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Invesco Bond Fund (VBF) is a ETF from Invesco (US). Over the past year IVV returned +23.70% while VBF returned +0.15%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.80% versus a loss of 1.13% for VBF.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.49% per year against +5.16% for VBF; over five years the annualized figures are +13.43% and -1.89% respectively. Across the full 26-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.05% annualized vs -0.06%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.1% compared with 10.5% for VBF. 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 -41.6% for VBF. 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 0.30. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while VBF charges 0.54%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $54 annually, a gap of $51 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 5.07% for VBF.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and VBF share 3 holdings out of 1519 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.1% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or VBF?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while VBF charges 0.54%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $51 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or VBF?
Over the past year IVV returned +23.70% vs +0.15% for VBF, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (26 years), IVV annualized +7.05% vs -0.06% for VBF. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or VBF?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 10.5% for VBF. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs VBF -41.6%.
Should I hold both IVV and VBF?
IVV and VBF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.30, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and VBF?
IVV and VBF share 3 common holdings with a 0.1% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 1519 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or VBF?
IVV yields 1.09% while VBF yields 5.07%, so VBF 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.