IVV vs VGT
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Vanguard Information Technology ETF
Which is better, IVV or VGT?
Large Cap Blend against Large Cap Growth.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. VGT led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 62.4%.
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 | VGT |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.09% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $160.6B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 0.36% |
| Holdings | 508 | 324 |
| YTD Return | +11.03% | +26.13%Best |
| 1Y Return | +15.62% | +31.95%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.81% | +31.30%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.61% | +18.29%Best |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.6%Best | 19.5% |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -54.8%Best |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,109 | $23,160Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.8%Best | 62.4% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jan 26, 2004 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jan 30, 2004 to Sep 16, 2026 (22.6 years).
IVV vs VGT 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 22.6 years both funds cover.
IVV vs VGT Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Vanguard Information Technology ETF (VGT) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year IVV returned +15.62% while VGT returned +31.95%. Year to date, IVV is up 11.03% versus a gain of 26.13% for VGT.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +20.81% per year against +31.30% for VGT; over five years the annualized figures are +12.61% and +18.29% respectively. Across the full 23-year window we track, VGT has the edge at +14.18% annualized vs +9.12%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VGT has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.5% compared with 14.6% 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 -54.8% for VGT. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.90. 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 VGT charges 0.09%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $9 annually, a gap of $6 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 0.36% for VGT.
Holdings Overlap
37.5% of IVV's money is in holdings VGT also owns. 86.9% of VGT's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
Most of VGT is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
71 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 316 in VGT, against full books of 508 and 324.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 209 positions for VGT that do not appear in our book for IVV (12.6% of the fund), and 411 for IVV that do not appear in VGT (61.1%).
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 VGT | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.07% | 17.16% | 9.09% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 7.02% | 16.25% | 9.23% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.69% | 10.96% | 5.27% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.65% | 4.21% | 1.56% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.63% | 3.82% | 2.19% |
| AMDAdvanced Micro Devices Inc | 1.16% | 3.18% | 2.02% |
| CSCOCisco Systems Inc. - Ordinary Shares | 0.66% | 1.91% | 1.25% |
| INTCIntel Corporation | 0.67% | 1.65% | 0.98% |
| AMATApplied Materials, Inc. | 0.55% | 1.69% | 1.14% |
| LRCXLam Research Corp | 0.57% | 1.54% | 0.97% |
86.9% of VGT 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 VGT?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while VGT charges 0.09%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $6 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or VGT?
Over the past year IVV returned +15.62% vs +31.95% for VGT, so VGT leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (23 years), IVV annualized +9.12% vs +14.18% for VGT. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or VGT?
VGT has been the more volatile fund at 19.5% annualized versus 14.6% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs VGT -54.8%.
Should I hold both IVV and VGT?
IVV and VGT have a monthly-return correlation of 0.90, 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 VGT?
86.9% of VGT's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 86.9% of VGT's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 71 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 316 in VGT.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or VGT?
IVV yields 1.06% while VGT yields 0.36%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VGT better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. VGT led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.90. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 62.4%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.