IVV vs WBND
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Western Asset Total Return ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. WBND offers more diversification with 512 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | WBND | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.65% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $10M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 4.06% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 512 | |
| YTD Return | +12.28% | +4.40% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.94% | +1.11% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.81% | +1.75% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.05% | -2.98% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 142.2% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -81.5% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Franklin Templeton Investments (US) | |
| Category | Equity | Fixed Income | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Oct 3, 2018 |
IVV vs WBND Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Western Asset Total Return ETF (WBND) is a ETF from Franklin Templeton Investments (US). Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% while WBND returned +1.11%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.28% versus a gain of 4.40% for WBND.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.81% per year against +1.75% for WBND; over five years the annualized figures are +13.05% and -2.98% respectively. Across the full 7-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +6.98% annualized vs +0.85%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
WBND has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 142.2% 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 -81.5% for WBND. 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 0.02. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while WBND charges 0.65%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $65 annually, a gap of $62 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 4.06% for WBND.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or WBND?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while WBND charges 0.65%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $62 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or WBND?
Over the past year IVV returned +20.94% vs +1.11% for WBND, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (7 years), IVV annualized +6.98% vs +0.85% for WBND. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or WBND?
WBND has been the more volatile fund at 142.2% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs WBND -81.5%.
Should I hold both IVV and WBND?
IVV and WBND have a monthly-return correlation of 0.02, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or WBND?
IVV yields 1.10% while WBND yields 4.06%, so WBND 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.