IVV vs WLTG
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs WealthTrust DBS Long Term Growth ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. WLTG delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 508 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | WLTG | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.74% | |
| AUM | $907.0B | $80M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.10% | 4.14% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 37 | |
| YTD Return | +12.76% | +10.14% | |
| 1Y Return | +20.14% | +21.06% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.69% | +23.32% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.00% | - | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 13.7% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -25.1% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | WealthTrust Asset Management | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Dec 6, 2021 |
IVV vs WLTG Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and WealthTrust DBS Long Term Growth ETF (WLTG) is a ETF from WealthTrust Asset Management. Over the past year IVV returned +20.14% while WLTG returned +21.06%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.76% versus a gain of 10.14% for WLTG.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.69% per year against +23.32% for WLTG. Across the full 5-year window we track, WLTG has the edge at +10.54% annualized vs +6.99%. 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 13.7% for WLTG. 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 -25.1% for WLTG. 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 0.92. 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 WLTG charges 0.74%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $74 annually, a gap of $71 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.10% against 4.14% for WLTG.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and WLTG share 26 holdings out of 518 unique holdings combined, representing a 21.3% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or WLTG?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while WLTG charges 0.74%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $71 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or WLTG?
Over the past year IVV returned +20.14% vs +21.06% for WLTG, so WLTG leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (5 years), IVV annualized +6.99% vs +10.54% for WLTG. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or WLTG?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 13.7% for WLTG. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs WLTG -25.1%.
Should I hold both IVV and WLTG?
IVV and WLTG have a monthly-return correlation of 0.92, so they move almost identically. Holding both adds little diversification - most investors pick one, usually on fees or the specific index tracked.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and WLTG?
IVV and WLTG share 26 common holdings with a 21.3% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 518 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or WLTG?
IVV yields 1.10% while WLTG yields 4.14%, so WLTG 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.