IVV vs VONE

IVV vs VONE

Which is better, IVV or VONE?

Nearly the same fund. IVV costs less.

IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 1.00. VONE is less concentrated, with 33.3% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 37.8%.

Lower Fees: IVVHigher Returns: IVVLess Concentrated: VONE

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

MetricIVVVONE
Expense Ratio0.03%Best0.06%
AUM$876.4B$8.4B
Dividend Yield1.06%1.03%
Holdings5081,029
YTD Return+11.51%Best+11.15%
1Y Return+15.96%Best+15.30%
3Y Return (annualized)+21.01%Best+20.70%
5Y Return (annualized)+12.66%Best+11.92%
Volatility (annualized)14.1%Best14.4%
Max Drawdown-33.9%Best-34.7%
$10,000 over 5 years$18,149Best$17,561
Top 10 Weight37.8%33.3%Best
Fund FamilyiShares by BlackRock (US)Vanguard (US)
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap BlendLarge Cap Blend
InceptionMay 15, 2000Sep 20, 2010

Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 22, 2010 to Sep 15, 2026 (16 years).

IVV vs VONE 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 16 years both funds cover.

IVV vs VONE Performance

iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Vanguard Russell 1000 ETF (VONE) is an ETF from Vanguard (US). Over the past year IVV returned +15.96% while VONE returned +15.30%. Year to date, IVV is up 11.51% versus a gain of 11.15% for VONE.

Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.01% per year against +20.70% for VONE; over five years the annualized figures are +12.66% and +11.92% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +13.13% annualized vs +13.11%.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns

VONE has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 14.4% compared with 14.1% 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 -33.9% for IVV and -34.7% for VONE. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.

The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 1.00. 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 VONE charges 0.06%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $6 annually, a gap of $3 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 1.03% for VONE.

Holdings Overlap

IVV already in VONE96.1%
VONE already in IVV88.3%

96.1% of IVV's money is in holdings VONE also owns. 88.3% of VONE's money is in holdings IVV also owns.

Most of IVV is already inside VONE. Owning both mostly buys the same companies twice.

The two holdings books were reported 62 days apart, IVV as of Aug 31, 2026 and VONE as of Jun 30, 2026, so some of the difference between them is the time between the two reports rather than the funds.

470 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 1,019 in VONE, against full books of 508 and 1,029.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 455 positions for VONE that do not appear in our book for IVV (10.3% of the fund), and 13 for IVV that do not appear in VONE (2.6%).

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

StockWeight in IVVWeight in VONEDifference
NVDANvidia Corp8.07%6.70%1.37%
AAPLApple, Inc7.02%6.01%1.01%
MSFTMicrosoft Corp5.69%3.98%1.71%
AMZNAmazon.Com Inc3.84%3.32%0.52%
GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A3.00%2.99%0.01%
AVGOBroadcom Inc2.65%2.52%0.13%
GOOGAlphabet Inc2.39%2.41%0.02%
METAMeta Platforms Inc1.90%1.78%0.12%
MUMicron Technology, Inc.1.63%1.87%0.24%
TSLATesla Inc1.56%1.76%0.20%

96.1% of IVV is already inside VONE.

You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.

IVVVONE

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, IVV or VONE?

IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while VONE charges 0.06%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $3 a year on a $10,000 investment.

Which performed better, IVV or VONE?

Over the past year IVV returned +15.96% vs +15.30% for VONE, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), IVV annualized +13.13% vs +13.11% for VONE. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.

Which is riskier, IVV or VONE?

VONE has been the more volatile fund at 14.4% annualized versus 14.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -33.9% vs VONE -34.7%.

Should I hold both IVV and VONE?

IVV and VONE have a monthly-return correlation of 1.00, 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 VONE?

96.1% of IVV's money is in holdings VONE also owns. 88.3% of VONE's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 470 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 1,019 in VONE.

Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or VONE?

IVV yields 1.06% while VONE yields 1.03%, so IVV currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is VONE 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 1.00. VONE is less concentrated, with 33.3% 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.