IVV vs WTMF
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs WisdomTree Managed Futures Strategy Fund
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. IVV delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | WTMF | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.66% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $243M | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 2.84% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 30 | |
| YTD Return | +13.43% | +8.34% | |
| 1Y Return | +22.61% | +18.23% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.47% | +9.96% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.26% | +6.25% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 6.4% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -30.8% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | WisdomTree Investments | |
| Category | Equity | Alternative | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Jan 5, 2011 |
IVV vs WTMF Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and WisdomTree Managed Futures Strategy Fund (WTMF) is a ETF from WisdomTree Investments. Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% while WTMF returned +18.23%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.43% versus a gain of 8.34% for WTMF.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.47% per year against +9.96% for WTMF; over five years the annualized figures are +13.26% and +6.25% respectively. Across the full 16-year window we track, IVV has the edge at +7.03% annualized vs +1.15%. 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 6.4% for WTMF. 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 -30.8% for WTMF. 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 0.22. They move independently enough that combining them can meaningfully diversify a portfolio.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while WTMF charges 0.66%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $66 annually, a gap of $63 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 2.84% for WTMF.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and WTMF share 0 holdings out of 506 unique holdings combined, representing a 0.0% weight overlap.
Moderate overlap means holding both could provide meaningful diversification benefits.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, IVV or WTMF?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while WTMF charges 0.66%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $63 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or WTMF?
Over the past year IVV returned +22.61% vs +18.23% for WTMF, so IVV leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (16 years), IVV annualized +7.03% vs +1.15% for WTMF. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or WTMF?
IVV has been the more volatile fund at 15.1% annualized versus 6.4% for WTMF. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs WTMF -30.8%.
Should I hold both IVV and WTMF?
IVV and WTMF have a monthly-return correlation of 0.22, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and WTMF?
IVV and WTMF share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 506 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or WTMF?
IVV yields 1.09% while WTMF yields 2.84%, so WTMF 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.