IVV vs WLTG
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs WealthTrust DBS Long Term Growth ETF
Which is better, IVV or WLTG?
Each has led over a different period.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window, WLTG over 3Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 43.8%.
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 | WLTG |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.74% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $78M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 4.00% |
| Holdings | 508 | 41 |
| YTD Return | +11.03%Best | +7.79% |
| 1Y Return | +15.62%Best | +14.71% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +20.81% | +22.20%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.61% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.8% | 13.7%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -24.5%Best | -25.1% |
| $10,000 over 4.8 years | $17,280Best | $15,739 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.8%Best | 43.8% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | WealthTrust Asset Management |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Dec 6, 2021 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 4.8 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Dec 7, 2021 to Sep 16, 2026 (4.8 years).
IVV vs WLTG 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 4.8 years both funds cover.
IVV vs WLTG Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and WealthTrust DBS Long Term Growth ETF (WLTG) is an ETF from WealthTrust Asset Management. Over the past year IVV returned +15.62% while WLTG returned +14.71%. Year to date, IVV is up 11.03% versus a gain of 7.79% for WLTG.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +20.81% per year against +22.20% for WLTG.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
IVV has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 15.8% 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 -24.5% for IVV and -25.1% for WLTG. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
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 1.06% against 4.00% for WLTG.
Holdings Overlap
38.4% of IVV's money is in holdings WLTG also owns. 59.0% of WLTG's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
30 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 44 in WLTG, against full books of 508 and 41.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 13 positions for WLTG that do not appear in our book for IVV (37.2% of the fund), and 452 for IVV that do not appear in WLTG (60.2%).
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 WLTG | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.07% | 3.97% | 4.10% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 7.02% | 1.58% | 5.44% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.69% | 1.91% | 3.78% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.84% | 2.89% | 0.95% |
| GOOGLAlphabet Inc,class A | 3.00% | 2.28% | 0.72% |
| METAMeta Platforms Inc | 1.90% | 3.06% | 1.16% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 1.38% | 3.48% | 2.10% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 2.65% | 1.92% | 0.73% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 1.63% | 2.40% | 0.77% |
| BKBank Of New York Mellon Corp | 0.17% | 3.16% | 2.99% |
59.0% of WLTG 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 WLTG?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while WLTG charges 0.74%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $71 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or WLTG?
Over the past year IVV returned +15.62% vs +14.71% for WLTG, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or WLTG?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.8% annualized versus 13.7% for WLTG. Worst drawdown: IVV -24.5% 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. 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 WLTG?
59.0% of WLTG's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 59.0% of WLTG's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 30 positions in common, counted across the 490 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 44 in WLTG.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or WLTG?
IVV yields 1.06% while WLTG yields 4.00%, so WLTG currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is WLTG better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y and the full window, WLTG over 3Y. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.92. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 43.8%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.