IVV vs WOOD
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF
Which is better, IVV or WOOD?
IVV has been ahead.
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.5%.
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 | WOOD |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03%Best | 0.39% |
| AUM | $876.4B | $270M |
| Dividend Yield | 1.06% | 2.35% |
| Holdings | 508 | 42 |
| YTD Return | +12.51%Best | -1.98% |
| 1Y Return | +17.57%Best | -4.20% |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.27%Best | +0.84% |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +12.95%Best | -2.47% |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.6%Best | 22.5% |
| Max Drawdown | -48.4%Best | -63.8% |
| $10,000 over 5 years | $18,384Best | $8,825 |
| Top 10 Weight | 37.9%Best | 57.5% |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | iShares by BlackRock (US) |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Blend | Large Cap Blend |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jun 24, 2008 |
Volatility and max drawdown are measured over the window both funds cover: Jun 25, 2008 to Sep 11, 2026 (18.2 years).
IVV vs WOOD 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 18.2 years both funds cover.
IVV vs WOOD Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and iShares Global Timber & Forestry ETF (WOOD) is an ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US). Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% while WOOD returned -4.20%. Year to date, IVV is up 12.51% versus a loss of 1.98% for WOOD.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.27% per year against +0.84% for WOOD; over five years the annualized figures are +12.95% and -2.47% respectively. Across the full 18-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +10.61% annualized vs +2.64%.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
WOOD has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 22.5% compared with 15.6% 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 -48.4% for IVV and -63.8% for WOOD. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.80. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while WOOD charges 0.39%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $39 annually, a gap of $36 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.06% against 2.35% for WOOD.
Holdings Overlap
0.2% of IVV's money is in holdings WOOD also owns. 12.6% of WOOD's money is in holdings IVV also owns.
WOOD and IVV share little of their money.
3 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 26 in WOOD, against full books of 508 and 42.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 3 positions for WOOD that do not appear in our book for IVV (14.0% of the fund), and 492 for IVV that do not appear in WOOD (99.1%).
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.
You are not choosing between two funds in isolation.
Whichever of IVV and WOOD you pick has to sit alongside everything else you own. Add the rest and see what the combination actually holds.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or WOOD?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while WOOD charges 0.39%. IVV is the cheaper option, by $36 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, IVV or WOOD?
Over the past year IVV returned +17.57% vs -4.20% for WOOD, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (18 years), IVV annualized +10.61% vs +2.64% for WOOD. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, IVV or WOOD?
WOOD has been the more volatile fund at 22.5% annualized versus 15.6% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -48.4% vs WOOD -63.8%.
Should I hold both IVV and WOOD?
IVV and WOOD have a monthly-return correlation of 0.80, so their returns are far enough apart for the mix to behave differently from either one alone. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and WOOD?
12.6% of WOOD's money is in holdings IVV also owns. 12.6% of WOOD's is in holdings IVV also owns. They hold 3 positions in common, counted across the 505 positions we hold weights for in IVV and 26 in WOOD.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or WOOD?
IVV yields 1.06% while WOOD yields 2.35%, so WOOD currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is WOOD better than IVV?
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV led over 1Y, 3Y, 5Y and the full window. IVV is less concentrated, with 37.9% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 57.5%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.