IVV vs VIS
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Vanguard Industrials ETF
Which is better, IVV or VIS?
IVV has been ahead.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. VIS is less concentrated, with 30.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%.
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 | VIS |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.09% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $8.8B |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 0.92% |
| Holdings | 508 | 399 |
| YTD Return | +12.39%Best | +7.41% |
| 1Y Return | +16.61%Best | +11.82% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.38%Best | +18.93% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.51%Best | +12.89% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 14.8%Best | 19.0% |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5%Best | -64.9% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,844Best | $18,335 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.8% | 30.4%Best |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Vanguard (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Sep 23, 2004 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 29, 2004 to Sep 18, 2026 (22 years).
IVV vs VIS 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 years both funds cover.
IVV vs VIS Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Vanguard Industrials ETF (VIS) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year IVV returned +16.61% while VIS returned +11.82%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.39% versus a gain of 7.41% for VIS.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.38% per year against +18.93% for VIS; over five years the annualized figures are +13.51% and +12.89% respectively. Across the full 22-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +9.54% annualized vs +9.33%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
VIS has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.0% compared with 14.8% 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 -64.9% for VIS. 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 VIS 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 0.92% for VIS.
Holdings Overlap
7.9% of IVV's money is in holdings VIS also owns. 73.9% of VIS's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
Most of VIS is already inside IVV. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.
78 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 395 in VIS, against full books of 508 and 399.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 282 positions for VIS that do not appear in our book for IVV (24.6% of the fund), and 404 for IVV that do not appear in VIS (90.8%).
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 VIS | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| CATCaterpillar, Inc. | 0.55% | 5.30% | 4.75% |
| GEGeneral Electric Co. | 0.53% | 5.26% | 4.73% |
| RTXRaytheon Co. | 0.42% | 4.05% | 3.63% |
| GEVGE Vernova Inc. CDR (CAD Hedged) | 0.36% | 3.73% | 3.37% |
| BABoeing Co | 0.25% | 2.25% | 2.00% |
| UNPUnion Pacific Corp | 0.27% | 2.09% | 1.82% |
| DEDeere & Co Sedol 2261203 | 0.25% | 2.01% | 1.76% |
| UBERUber Technologies Inc | 0.23% | 1.75% | 1.52% |
| PHParker-Hannifin Corp. | 0.19% | 1.72% | 1.53% |
| LMTLockheed Martin Corp | 0.17% | 1.69% | 1.52% |
73.9% of VIS 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 VIS?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while VIS charges 0.09%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $6 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or VIS?
Over the past year IVV returned +16.61% vs +11.82% for VIS, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (22 years), IVV annualized +9.54% vs +9.33% for VIS. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or VIS?
VIS has been the more volatile fund at 19.0% annualized versus 14.8% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs VIS -64.9%.
Should I hold both IVV and VIS?
IVV and VIS 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 VIS?
73.9% of VIS's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 73.9% of VIS's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 78 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 395 in VIS.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or VIS?
IVV yields 1.06% while VIS yields 0.92%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is VIS better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. VIS is less concentrated, with 30.4% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.