IVV vs XCEM
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF vs Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF
Quick Verdict
IVV has a lower expense ratio. XCEM delivered stronger 1-year returns. IVV offers more diversification with 505 holdings.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | IVV | XCEM | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.03% | 0.16% | |
| AUM | $865.2B | $2.0B | |
| Dividend Yield | 1.09% | 2.40% | |
| Holdings | 508 | 338 | |
| YTD Return | +13.72% | +28.75% | |
| 1Y Return | +21.64% | +49.22% | |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +21.55% | +24.39% | |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +13.27% | +11.50% | |
| Volatility (annualized) | 15.1% | 19.6% | |
| Max Drawdown | -56.5% | -41.2% | |
| Fund Family | iShares by BlackRock (US) | Columbia Threadneedle Investments | |
| Category | Equity | Equity | |
| Inception | May 15, 2000 | Sep 1, 2015 |
IVV vs XCEM Performance
iShares Core S&P 500 ETF (IVV) is a ETF from iShares by BlackRock (US) and Columbia EM Core ex-China ETF (XCEM) is a ETF from Columbia Threadneedle Investments. Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% while XCEM returned +49.22%. Year to date, IVV is up 13.72% versus a gain of 28.75% for XCEM.
Over three years, IVV compounded at +21.55% per year against +24.39% for XCEM; over five years the annualized figures are +13.27% and +11.50% respectively. Across the full 11-year window we track, XCEM has the edge at +11.90% annualized vs +7.04%. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
XCEM has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 19.6% 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 -41.2% for XCEM. 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 0.72. They usually move together, but the gap leaves some room for diversification.
Fees and Cost Over Time
IVV charges 0.03% per year while XCEM charges 0.16%. On a $10,000 position that is $3 vs $16 annually, a gap of $13 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, IVV currently yields 1.09% against 2.40% for XCEM.
Holdings Overlap
IVV and XCEM share 0 holdings out of 947 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 XCEM?
IVV has an expense ratio of 0.03% while XCEM charges 0.16%. IVV is the cheaper option. On a $10,000 investment, that is $13 per year of difference.
Which performed better, IVV or XCEM?
Over the past year IVV returned +21.64% vs +49.22% for XCEM, so XCEM leads on 1-year performance. Over the longest common window we track (11 years), IVV annualized +7.04% vs +11.90% for XCEM. Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Which is riskier, IVV or XCEM?
XCEM has been the more volatile fund at 19.6% annualized versus 15.1% for IVV. Worst drawdown: IVV -56.5% vs XCEM -41.2%.
Should I hold both IVV and XCEM?
IVV and XCEM have a monthly-return correlation of 0.72, so combining them can provide real diversification depending on your allocation goals.
What is the holdings overlap between IVV and XCEM?
IVV and XCEM share 0 common holdings with a 0.0% weight overlap. Combined, they hold 947 unique securities.
Which pays a higher dividend, IVV or XCEM?
IVV yields 1.09% while XCEM yields 2.40%, so XCEM 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.